BABITA NETAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was granted compassionate appointment on the basis of 'no objection' given by respondent No.5 in the past and, therefore, termination of services of the petitioner on the complaint of respondent No.5 was not justified. The other ground of challenge is that the petitioner, in any case, ought to be afforded opportunity of hearing before passing the impugned order.

(3.) In the present case, learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that the policy of compassionate appointment which was in force at the time of death of employee was one which was promulgated on 14th June, 2013. Clause 5 of the said policy deals with eligible members of family of the deceased employee where the deceased Govt. servant happens to be a married person. Clause 6 thereof deals with those cases where the deceased employee was unmarried or a widower without any son and daughter. In the present case, the deceased employee left behind his widow. Therefore, in his case, clause 5 of the policy dated 14th June, 2013 will apply, which reads as under: