LPA No.643 of 2009(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 643 of 2009(O&M) Date of decision 23.7.2009 State of Haryana and others ..Appellants Versus Roshni Devi and others ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Ms.Ritu Bahri, DAG Hy. for the appellants 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement ? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. The State of Haryana has invoked Clause X of the Letters Patent by preferring the instant appeal against order dated 20.2.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP No. 665 of 2008. The learned Single Judge has concluded that respondent Roshni Devi who is the widow having lost her husband on 31.10.2002, who was in service, cannot be denied the lump sum ex-gratia grant amounting to Rs. 2.50 lacs as per the policy of the State Government concerning compassionate appointment. Accordingly a direction has been issued to release the compassionate assistance of Rs. 2.50 lacs. We have heard the learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. She has not been able to advance any argument warranting interference of this Court in the equitable order passed by the learned Single Judge. According to the learned State counsel the respondent had refused to take compassionate assistance of Rs. 2.50 lacs when it was offered to her as is LPA No.643 of 2009(O&M) 2 evident from the perusal of her communication dated 29.3.2005 (R.2). In the aforesaid communication she has insisted on availing of compassionate appointment and therefore the compassionate assistance can also not be given to her. Having heard the learned State counsel we are of the view that the learned Single Judge has taken a correct view by holding that the respondent-widow could not be deprived of both the benefits. Merely because at one stage she had refused to avail the compassionate assistance amounting to Rs. 2.50 lacs would not constitute a basis to deny her the benefit once compassionate appointment has not been given to her. There is thus no merit in the appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. In view of the dismissal of the appeal on merits, we do not feel the necessity of passing any order on the applications seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal and delay in re-filing the appeal. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Jaswant Singh) 23.7.2009 Judge okg