ANITA CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prayer made in the present application No. 17033 of 2002 is for staying the operation of order dated October 8, 2001 passed by the Lok Adalat. Through C.M. No. 4377 of 2002 the State of Haryana, respondent has separately filed objections against the aforesaid order passed by the Lok Adalat. The averments made in the CM No. 4377 of 2002 whereby the objections have been filed against the order of the Lok Adalat may be noticed as follows :

(2.) SOME facts which are relevant for the present controversy may be noticed as follows :- The present Civil Writ Petition No. 5777 of 1995 was filed by petitioner Anita Chauhan under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to absorb her in Government service on compassionate ground in view of the policy of the State Government. It was stated that the husband of the petitioner died while in service, therefore, she was entitled to be appointed on ex-gratia base, as per policy. It was averred by the petitioner in the writ petition that husband of petitioner Varinder Singh Chauhan was appointed as a Math Master in the Haryana Education Department on December 15, 1986. A copy of the appointment order of the aforesaid Varinder Singh Chauhan has been attached as Annexure P/3 with the petition which shows that he was appointed on purely temporary (as ad hoc in the pay scale of Rs. 525-1025 plus other admissible allowances). Unfortunately the husband of the petitioner died on September 3, 1990 leaving behind the present petitioner i.e. his wife and a daughter aged three months. It is averred in the petition that the petitioner at the time of death of her husband was possessing the qualification of B.A. B.Ed and, therefore, she submitted an application for her absorption in the State service on December 17, 1990. She repeated her request and issued reminders in that regard but since the petitioner was not absorbed in the State service on compassionate ground, therefore, she filed the present writ petition. Upon notice issued to the respondents, a written statement has been filed by respondents No. 1 to 3. In the written statements, the claim of the petitioner has been contested by the respondents stating that since Varinder Singh husband of the petitioner was working as a Math Master on ad hoc basis in the department and there is no provision to absorb the family member of a deceased employee working on ad hoc basis and to grant other pensionary benefits, therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to be absorbed in service on compassionate ground and also was not entitled to any other kind of pensionary and other benefits. It was specifically stated that as per the State Government policy dated December 22, 1970 which has been attached as Annexure P/5 with the petition had been amended and as per amended policy, the benefit of employment on ex gratia and other pensionary benefits were to be granted only to the family member of the deceased employee working on regular basis and not on ad hoc basis.

(3.) IT is against this order passed by the Lok Adalat that the objections have been filed by the respondent through CM No. 4377 of 2002. Specific objections have been raised to the order of the Lok Adalat which have been reproduced above in the earlier part of this judgment.