SANDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the paper book.

(2.) Father of the petitioner expired on 23.6.1993 while he was in service of the Punjab Government. At that time, the petitioner was a student. On attaining the age of majority, the petitioner made an application for compassionate appointment on 18.5.1995. After a period of four years on 3.11.1999, the petitioner was appointed as Naib Tehsildar by the then Commissioner, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur. He was directed to join the post on 4.11.1999. On 12.11.1999, the order of appointment was withdrawn as according to the appointing authority, the order of the appointment suffered from a number of legal infirmities. The petitioner challenged the aforesaid order by filing CWP No. 16938 of 1999. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 15.11.1999 by passing a speaking order. On the basis of the aforesaid direction, the respondents have passed the order dated 28.1.2002 rejecting the representation. This order is also passed by the Commissioner, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur.

(3.) It is vehemently argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the order dated 3.11.1999 appointing the petitioner had been passed by the Commissioner and subsequent order dated 12.11.1999 withdrawing the order of appointment was also passed by the Commissioner, the representation should have been decided by the Financial Commissioner, Punjab. According to the learned counsel, the Commissioner has sat in appeal on an order of the earlier Commissioner.