RSA No.1261 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
RSA No.1261 of 2009.
Decided on: October 22, 2009.
Sanjay Kumar
.. Appellant
VERSUS
State of Haryana and others
.. Respondents
***
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI
PRESENT Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL)
Suit of appellant had been decreed by the trial
Court holding that he is entitled to a job on compassionate ground in
place of deceased Tulsi Ram being his eldest son besides holding
that plaintiff-defendant No.4, and minor children of defendant No.4
are entitled to all benefits arising out of death of Tulsi Ram i.e. GPF,
GIS, Leave encashment etc. in equal shares. Only defendant No.4
and her minor children were held entitled as per their share to the
retiral benefits in an appeal filed by the State of Haryana-respondent
on the basis of the policy and rules land regulations of appointment
on compassionate ground. It was held that only consideration for the
… 1
RSA No.1261 of 2009
job is permissible, as such, the order passed by the trial Court was
modified clarifying that if petitioner or his step-mother (defendant
No.4), are found fit for appointment on compassionate then their
claim shall be dealt with in accordance with law and in accordance
with relevant scheme applicable at the time of death of deceased.
The appellant-defendant No.4, and minor children of the deceased
were held to be entitled to disbursement of the retiral benefits.
Counsel for the appellant has submitted that
defendant-respondent No.4, has admitted that she is not interested
in the compassionate appointment, as such, a direction is sought for
modification of the order passed by lower appellate Court to the
effect that a direction should be given to the respondent to appoint
the appellant on compassionate ground.
In view of the waiver of the right of respondent
No.2, for appointment , it has also been suggested by counsel for the
appellant that the matter be sent to the Mediation and Reconciliation
Centre for amicable settlement as the appellant himself is not
interested in the retiral benefits but is only interested in appointment
on compassionate ground.
I have heard the counsel for the appellant and
considered the facts and circumstances of the case. In case the
appellant is eligible as per the scheme framed by the State for
compassionate appointment or any compensation, he would be
entitled to the same and on account of waiver of respondent No.2,
plaintiff-appellant only will be eligible to seek the benefit of the
… 2
RSA No.1261 of 2009
scheme framed by the Government for appointment on
compassionate ground in case appellant waives his rights in other
benefits. No fault can be found in the finding recorded by the lower
Court in favour of respondent No.2 and her minor children regarding
the disbursement of the retiral benefits.
In view of above observations, no ground is made
out for interference in the impugned order as no substantial question
arises for adjudication.
Disposed of.
(M.M.S.BEDI)
JUDGE
October 22, 2009.
rka
… 3