SHANTI DEVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the action of the respondents denying her ex-gratia appointment/financial assistance, to which she is entitled to under the Rules/Instructions issued by the Government of Haryana from time to time. In the alternative a prayer has also been made for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant appointment to her son-Surender Kumar.

(2.) Briefly, the facts of the case are that the husband of the petitioner-Late Mahabir Singh was working as a Head Constable in 4th Battalion, Haryana Armed Police, Madhuban when he died on 12.11.1996, during the course of employment. As per the instructions dated 13.7.1971 issued by the Government of Haryana, one dependent of the deceased Government employee was entitled to be appointed in Government service on compassionate grounds. She accordingly submitted application dated 27.12.1996 which was received in the office of the Commandant, 4th Battalion, HAP, Madhuban on 1.1.1997 wherein she requested for granting employment to her son, who was 11 years old at the time of death of his father. This application was forwarded by the Commandant to the Director General of Police, vide office memo. dated 6.1.1997 mentioning therein that one post be kept reserved till the son of the petitioner attained majority. In response thereto, the Director General of Police, Haryana informed the office of the Commandant vide letter dated 15.4.1998 that name of Surender Kumar son of Late Head Constable Mahabir Singh stands entered in minor register at Sr.No.21. Son of the petitioner was to attain majority in the year 2003.

(3.) Thereafter, petitioner submitted applications dated 1.8.2002 and 17.8.2002 (Annexures R-2 and R-3) respectively, directly to the Director General of Police requesting that she may be given employment in the Police Department as she is willing to serve herself. The case of the petitioner was considered by the Director General of Police and rejected vide memo. dated 8.10.2002 being time barred as she had submitted her application after expiry of a period of six years. This order was conveyed to the petitioner. She then submitted a representation dated 14.12.2002 clarifying therein that she had applied in the year 1997 well in time as per the policy instructions and the name of her son stands registered at Sr.No.21 in the minor register. This was forwarded by the Commandant on 11.3.2004 to the Director General of Police, Haryana. The correspondence between the petitioner and respondents ensued but without any result.