JUDGMENT
G.S. Singhvi, J.
1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner for issue of a direction to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to appoint him as Peon on compassionate grounds.
2. In short, the case set up by the petitioner is that his father Nahar Singh was working as Sweeper-cum-Chowkidar in the Government High School, Sirah, at the time of his death on 27.4.1993. Shri Nahar Singh left behind his wife, Smt. Paramjit Kaur, the petitioner, four daughters and two others sons. Claiming himself to be the depend of Shri Nahar Singh, the petitioner submitted an application before the district Education officer (Secondary), Ludhiana for appointment on compassionate grounds. The petitioner pleads that some objections were raised to his application but he removed the same. Thereafter, he has been constantly making efforts to persuade the respondents 1 and 2 to appoint him on compassionate grounds and even though his case has been recommended by various functionaries, including a Member of legislative Assembly, no positive order has been passed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to appoint him in the Government service. He has pleaded that as per the directions issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana, his name has been shown in the list of heirs of late Shri Nahar Singh.
3. The Writ petition has been opposed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and in the reply filed by them, it has been stated that there are more than one claimants for appointment as dependent of Shri Nahar Singh, Shri Sukhwinder Singh son of Shri Nahar Singh has also made an application for appointment and his application has been supported by all other dependents. Respondents have also stated that the petitioner is married and is living separately from the other dependents of late Shri Nahar Singh and he is not looking after the family. He has also not filed the requisite affidavit as to become entitled to appointment on compassionate grounds. Respondents have placed on record the instructions issued by the Government of Punjab from time to time and they have pleaded that the petitioner has no locus standi to claim himself to be a dependent of the deceased employee.
4. I have heard learnd counsel for the petitioner and Assistant Advocate General and in my opinion the present one is not a fit case for issue of a writ of mandamus to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to appoint the petitioner. Though the petitioner has claimed himself to be a dependant of late Shri Nahar Singh, he has not controverted the assertion made in the written statement that there are more than one applicants who have claimed appointment on compassionate grounds. He has also not denied the assertion made by respondents 1 and 2 as well as respondent 3 and 4 that he is living separate from the family of late Shri Nahar Sigh, His very claim of dependency over late Shri Nahar Singh has been contested by the respondents 1 to 4. In the face of this controversy, it is not possible for this Court to determine the issue as to whether the petitioner could be treated as a dependent of late Shri Nahar Singh so as a dependent of late Shri Nahar Singh so as to become entitle to be appointed on compassionate grounds. Issue of writ of mandamus in the face of controversy between the family members of the deceased employee would prejudicially affect the rights of others however, I am further of the view that it is a fit case in which a direction can be given to respondents 1 and 2 to consider claims made by the heirs of late Shri Nahar Singh for appointment on compassionate ground and decide the same within a specified period.
5. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to consider the claim of the petitioner and Sukhwinder Singh and any other heir of late Shri Nahar Singh for appointment on compassionate grounds on an appropriate post. Such consideration must be made by the respondents within a period of two months and appropriate order be issued appointing a dependent of the deceased employee in the Government Service. Parties to bear their own costs.
Petition disposed of.