IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 18314 of 2009 Date of decision: 04.04.2011 Bharosi Devi ...Petitioner Versus Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Parveen Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate for the respondents. RANJIT SINGH J. The husband of the petitioner, Mohan Singh, who was working as Assistant Line Man died on 01.07.2000. On the basis of policy formulated by the State Government, which has been adopted by the respondent-Corporation, the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment. Subsequently, some discrepancies were pointed out, which were removed on 24.02.2003. The petitioner, thereafter, pressed his appointment under the policy dated 08.05.1995. The petitioner was also asked to submit his option claiming financial assistance through communication dated 29.12.2006. Copy of the communication is attached with the petition as Annexure P-13. The stand taken is that the petitioner is not eligible for compassionate appointment under Ex-gratia scheme, however, the family will have option to opt for lump sum ex-gratia provided under Rules 2003 or 2005 as the case may be in lieu of monthly financial Civil Writ Petition No. 18314 of 2009 -2- assistance provided under Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the dependents of the Deceased Government Employee Rules, 2006. Since all the pending cases are to be governed by the rules formulated in 2006 Rules, the petitioner obviously can opt for financial assistance in terms of 2003 or 2005 Rules. This option has been exercised by the petitioner to get financial assistance, it will be fair to direct the respondents to release financial assistance to the petitioner under 2005 rules, for which the counsel has exercised option on behalf of the petitioner. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of in the above terms. April 04, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE