CWP No. 16758 of 2008` 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P.No. 16758 of 2008 Date of decision 22 .9.2008 Surender Singh ...Petitioner Versus Haryana State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation and another ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH Present: Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat, Advocate for the petitioner. 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 prayer made in this petition is for quashing order dated 22.7.2005 ( Annexure P.5) passed by the Board of Directors rejecting the claim of the petitioner for appointment as Clerk, order dated 27.7.2006 ( Annexure P.6) passed by the Registrar Cooperative Societies, Haryana upholding the order dated 22.7.2005 and order dated 4.6.2007 ( Annexure P.7) 19.7.2004 passed by the Secretary, Cooperation Haryana, rejecting the revision petition filed by the petitioner against the order dated 4.6.2007. Father of the petitioner was working as Manager Grade “C” with respondent no.1, expired on 28.1.1992 while he was in service. Mother of the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment of his son who was having matriculation qualification and was aged more than 18 years but the respondents did not consider the case of the petitioner for such appointment on the ground that a court case filed by respondent no.1 against CWP No. 16758 of 2008` 2 the order of reinstatement of father of the petitioner was pending. However, on 26.5.2003, the petitioner was offered appointment on the post of Peon and was given one moth's time to join the appointment. The petitioner then apprised the respondents that he had already appeared in the 10+2 examination and his result was likely to be announced very soon and requested that his case for appointment may be put to hold for 2+3 weeks so that after he qualifies 10 + 2 examination with second division and could be offered appointment on the post of Clerk. Result of the petitioner was declared on 8.6.2003. He passed 10 +2 examination with second division. He was fully eligible for the post of Clerk. Petitioner joined his duty on 10.6.2003 as Peon. On 10.7.2003, the petitioner again made a request for appointment as Clerk which was declined vide impugned order dated 22.7.2005. After hearing learned counsel we are of the view that this petition is devoid of any merit and is liable to be dismissed. It is well settled principle of law that compassionate appointment is not a regular mode of entry into public service but it is only to help the surviving members of the family to overcome sudden financial crises created by the death of the bread winner, as has been held by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the cases of Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. v.A.Radhika Thirumalai (1996) 3 SCC 394 and National Hydro Electric Power Corpr. v. Nanak Chand (2004) 12 SCC 487. It cannot be accepted that after such a huge delay of more than 16 years the crisis has continued to haunt the survivor and that the situation created by the death of the father of the petitioner is still prevailing. The petitioner has been offered the appointment as per his eligibility at the relevant time. There is no ground to issue direction to the CWP No. 16758 of 2008` 3 respondents for giving compassionate appointment to the petitioner on the post of Clerk. In view of the above, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Jora Singh) 22.9.2008 Judge okg