IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.15908 of 2009
Date of Decision: October 15, 2009
Paramjit Kaur
.....PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
State of Punjab & Another
.....RESPONDENT(S)
. . .
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA
PRESENT: - Dr. S.P. Shori, Advocate, for the
petitioner.
. . .
AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)
This petition has been filed under
Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of
mandamus directing the respondent-State to issue
letter of appointment favouring the petitioner
for the post of Clerk in Education Department.
It has been pleaded that husband of
the petitioner namely Jarnail Singh, served
Indian Army. While on active duty in `Operation
Pawan’ in Sri Lanka, husband of the petitioner
was wounded and finally expired on 27.9.1994. The
petitioner is eligible for the post of Clerk. It
has further been asserted that the petitioner has
CWP No.15908 of 2009 [2]
heavy responsibility of her in laws and family
members.
The petitioner applied for the post
of Clerk on 4.6.2003 vide application, Annexure
P-1. Thereafter, the petitioner has been pursuing
her case, however, relief has not been granted.
Impugned order, Annexure P-2, has been passed on
9.8.2006 thereby holding that case of the
petitioner does not fall within the four corners
of provisions or instructions issued on this
issue.
Learned counsel contends that
against Order, Annexure P-2, Secretary of the
Department has been approached.
I have considered the contention of
learned counsel.
Husband of the petitioner died in
the year 1994. The petitioner, for the first
time, filed an application for appointment in
June 2003. Order, Annexure P-2, mentions various
instructions and conditions on which such cases
can be considered. Essentially, the case of the
petitioner has been rejected on the ground that
the application ought to have been filed within
five years of death of the family member.
Having considered the grounds taken
by the respondents, I find no illegality in the
CWP No.15908 of 2009 [3]
approach of the respondents.
Essentially, the petitioner prays
for appointment on compassionate or exceptional
ground in view of death of her husband while
serving in Indian Army. The condition applied
viz. the fact that for a claim of 1994 the
application was filed in the year 2003 i.e. after
a considerable delay, appears to be reasonable.
Merely because the petitioner has
approached the Secretary, would not entitle the
petitioner to any relief in so much as the
petitioner has not made the claim under statutory
rules.
In view of the above, I find no
merit in the petition.
The petition is dismissed.
(AJAI LAMBA)
October 15, 2009 JUDGE
avin
1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?