URMILA Vs. UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WIDOW of deceased Chowkidar working on work charge basis with the erstwhile Haryana State Electricity Board (for short HSEB) and successor Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited by way of present writ petition is seeking financial assistance in lieu of compassionate appointment under the "Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules -2003 or 2006 as adopted by the respondent Utility Company.

(2.) NONE has appeared on behalf of the petitioner.

(3.) AFTER perusing the pleadings in view of the aforesaid facts, it is apparent that deceased Sumer Chand throughout remained as a work charge employee and therefore the claim of the son of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was declined inter alia on the ground that the dependent of the deceased was over age having attained the age above 40 years. Challenge to the said writ petition was made and the same was withdrawn with permission to seek terminal benefits. Thus it is apparent that the petitioner had accepted the disentitlement for compassionate appointment of the son of the deceased employee. Still further in the subsequent writ petition filed and decided on 7.1.2013, no claim for compassionate appointment or any compensation in lieu of the same was made. Hence the petitioner is estopped besides being non -suited on the principle of Order 2 Rule 2 CPC, to claim compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment at this highly belated stage. Thus, this Court finds no ground warranting interference in exercise of discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.