IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 13617 of 2010 Date of Decision: August 3, 2010 Sona Devi …Petitioner Versus The Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh and others. …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr. Balkar Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. The instant petition is directed against order dated 20.4.2010 (P-6), passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for brevity, ‘the Tribunal’), while dismissing the O.A. No. 301/HR/2010. Before the Tribunal the petitioner has challenged appointment of respondent No. 5, who had married the deceased after the death of the first wife. The only contention raised was that respondent No. 5 was not entitled to be granted compassionate appointment and the Tribunal has dismissed the Original Application by holding that after the death of the earlier wife, respondent No. 5 has married the deceased not during the life time of earlier wife. It shows the deceased had married respondent No. 5 when the earlier marriage did not subsist. There is, thus, no merit in the instant petition. Dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) August 3, 2010 JUDGE Pkapoor 2