AMIT SHRIVAS Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, dependant of late Ranglal Shrivas preferred an application for compassionate appointment. Deceased-Ranglal expired on 11/12/2009 after rendering services for more than 02 decades. The pension payment order Annexure-P/4 was issued in his favour. In this order it was mentioned that deceased worked from 12/03/1987 to 11/12/2009 (22 years 09 months).

(2.) PETITIONER 's application for grant of compassionate appointment is rejected by Annexure-P/9 dated 19/08/2010 on the ground that dependants of work charge contingency employees are not entitled for compassionate appointment and in lieu thereof, they are entitled for lump sum payment. This is challenged on the ground that as per Rule 2(c) of M.P. (Work Charge Contingency Paid Employees) Pension Rules, 1979 on completion of 15 years of service or above, the employee becomes a permanent employee, hence, by no stretch of imagination, petitioner's father can be treated as an employee on work charge and contingency basis, indeed he was a regular employee. That is the reason, in the PPO also it was mentioned that he was a regular employee. Shri Dudawat relied on judgment passed in this regard in W.P.No. 2731/2010 (Shahjad Khan Vs. State of M.P. & others), which was affirmed in W.A.NO. 110/2013.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.