C.W.P.No.5994 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.5994 of 2008 Date of Decision : April 09, 2008 Ravinder Kumar .....Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL Present : Shri Maharaj Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? JUDGMENT HEMANT GUPTA, J. The petitioner has invoked the extra ordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court seeking directions to the respondents to give ex-gratia employment to the petitioner on compassionate ground on account of the death of father of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that his father Shri Kashmiri Lal, working as Vaccinator with the Municipal Committee, Gharaunda, died on 7.8.2002. At the time of death of father of the petitioner, the petitioner was minor. The mother of the petitioner gave an affidavit dated 14.8.2002 to the effect that the ex-gratia case for employment be kept pending till her son attains the age of majority. The Municipal Committee, Gharaunda, in its C.W.P.No.5994 of 2008 2 meeting held on 11.10.2002, passed a resolution to keep the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment pending. After attaining majority, the petitioner submitted an application dated 19.1.2006, Annexure P-6, for employment on compassionate ground. The claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate appointment was rejected by the respondents on 28.5.2007 and sought option from the mother of the petitioner for ex- gratia financial assistance, either in lump sum or monthly financial assistance under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of the Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the `2006 Rules'). Petitioner earlier filed a writ petition before this Court seeking appointment on compassionate ground. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 18.10.2007 with the directions to the respondent-Municipal Committee, Gharaunda to decide the representation of the petitioner. The Municipal Committee, Gharaunda decided the representation of the petitioner vide order dated 31.1.2008, wherein it has been held that the petitioner is not entitled for compassionate appointment, but he is entitled to financial assistance in terms of the 2006 Rules. It is the case of the petitioner that at the time of death of his father on 7.8.2002, the Policy dated 8.5.1995, which was further modified on 31.8.1995, in respect of the appointment on compassionate ground, was in existence. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents are bound by the said Policy and the subsequent Rules, regulating the appointment on compassionate ground, cannot defeat the claim of the petitioner. Reliance is placed upon the order of Hon'ble C.W.P.No.5994 of 2008 3 Supreme Court in case “Abhishek Kumar Versus State of Haryana and others, 2007 (3) R.S.J.-121”, wherein the date of death was taken as relevant for grant of appointment on compassionate ground. No doubt, on the date of death of father of the petitioner, the 1995 Instructions were in force, but the petitioner has no right to seek appointment on compassionate ground on the basis of such Instructions alone. It has been repeatedly held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as by this Court that the Courts would not be justified in directing the appointment on compassionate ground as a matter of course. It has been held that the Authority concerned has to examine the financial condition of the family of the deceased and it is only if it is satisfied, that but for the provision of employment, the family will not be able to meet the crises, that a job is to be offered to the eligible member of the family. The consideration for such employment is not a vested right. The object of offering employment on compassionate ground is only to enable the family to get over the financial crises which it faces at the time of the death of the sole breadwinner. This Court in Civil Writ Petition No.6005 of 2007, Kuldip Kumar Versus Managing Director, Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and another, decided on 12.3.2008, has considered various judgment of this Court and of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, including the judgment in Abhishek Kumar's case, referred to by the petitioner, and held that the petitioner has no right to seek appointment on compassionate ground in terms of the policy as is applicable on the date of death of the deceased employee. The case of the petitioner for appointment on C.W.P.No.5994 of 2008 4 compassionate ground is to be considered in terms of the Rules or Policy applicable at the time of consideration of his case. In view of the above, we do not find any illegality or irregularity in the communication dated 28.5.2007, Annexure P-9, whereby an option is sought from the mother of the petitioner for ex-gratia financial assistance, either in lump sum or monthly financial assistance under the 2006 Rules. In view thereof, we dispose of the present writ petition with a liberty to the petitioner to opt for financial assistance in terms of the 2006 Rules. As and when the petitioner submits option under the 2006 Rules, the same shall be considered by the respondents within one month thereafter. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE April 09, 2008 (MOHINDER PAL) *mohinder JUDGE