Court No.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. Writ Petition (S/S) No.2 of 2003 Smt.Veena Kandwal …….. Petitioner Versus The District Inspector of School, Chamoli and others. …….. Respondents ………….. Sri Mangal Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri H.M.Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the State/respondents. Date: June 02, 2008. Hon’ble P.c.Verma,J. By means of this petition the petitioner has sought writ of direction to the respondents to grant compassionate appointment in pursuance of the Government Order dated 22.02.1995 and quash the appointment accepted on compelling circumstances. 2. The facts of the writ petition, in brief, are that the husband of the petitioner late Shri Satya Prakash Kandwal was working on the post of Assistant Teacher (L.T. Grade) in Government Inter College, Simali, District Chamoli. He died on 28.09.1998 due to his ailment. The petitioner made representation on 19.11.1998 before the respondent No.2 for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher under the Dying-in-Harness Rules. The respondent No.2 informed the petitioner on 02.08.1999 that the appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher under the Dying-in-Harness Rules has been banned vide Government Order No.1634/16 –11-98-1499(8) 77 dated 08.01.1999. Thereafter on 28.12.1999 the respondents offer the post of Junior Clerk to the petitioner and at present she is working on the said post at Government Girls Inter College, Gaucher, District-Chamoli. The petitioner is M.A. in Hindi and has completed her B.Ed. in the year 1998 from Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak. It is alleged by the petitioner that Sri Pradeep Kumar and Sri Harish Chandra Semwal have been appointed as Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade in Government Inter College, Ujwalpur, P.O.Bhatoli, District Chamoli under Dying-in-Harness Rules but the petitioner is being treated with hostile discrimination. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the application was moved by the petitioner in November 1998 she was having the requisite qualification for the appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade and by means of the Government Order dated 22.02.1995 the petitioner is entitled for the post of Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade. 4. The learned Standing Counsel for the State submits that once the petitioner has accepted the post of Junior Clerk, she cannot claim for any other post as the appointment to the petitioner was given on compassionate ground under Dying-in-Harness Rules. 5. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. The husband of the petitioner died on 28.09.1998. The application for compassionate appointment was submitted by the petitioner on 19.11.1998 in which she mentions that appointment may be given according to the qualification on the post of Assistant Teacher The respondents in Para-12 of the counter affidavit stated that subsequent G.O. No. 2367 /15-7-2000, dated 15th July, 2000 was issued by the Government by which the Government Order No.388/15-7-2(1)/95 dated 2nd February 1995 was revived and by virtue of revival of that Government Order the dependants of late Assistant Teachers become entitled for the appointment on the relevant post according to their qualification and accordingly Sri Harish Chandra Semwal has been given appointment as Assistant Teacher. It is also contended by the respondents that unfortunately at the time of the claim of the petitioner the Govt. Order dated 08.01.1999 was in force and as such she could not be appointed as Assistant Teacher. 6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner made an application for compassionate appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher on 19.11.1998. The Government Order banning the appointment as Assistant Teacher under the Dying-in-Harness Rules was issued on 08.01.1999. It appears that the Government Order dated 22.02.1995 was in existence on the date of application moved by the petitioner for appointment as Assistant Teacher. The argument of the learned Standing Counsel that once the petitioner has accepted the post of Junior Clerk she cannot agitate the matter, has no force. Under the compelling circumstances, the petitioner has accepted the offer of the respondents and her joining on the post of Junior Clerk will not deprive her from her legal rights. The respondents have not considered the fact that the petitioner possesses requisite qualification for the appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade. 7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the observations made above, the respondent No.2 is directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher L.T. Grade in accordance with the rules prevalent at the relevant time and quash the appointment accepted by her on compelling circumstances. 8. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (P.C.Verma,J.) 02.07.2008 P.Singh