ARVIND KUMAR SETHI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved by the rejection of his claim for compassionate appointment, the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and has prayed that communication (Annexure 'p-8') sent to his father by the Director of Primary Education, Haryana, be quashed and a mandamus be issued to the respondents directing them to appoint him on compassionate grounds.

(2.) THE factual backdrop of the case set up by the petitioner is that his father is a retired government servant who is in receipt of the pension. His mother was also serving the government as a J. B. T. Teacher at the time of her death on 5. 6. 1995. Claiming himself to be the dependent of his mother Smt. Shano Devi, the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment in terms of the instructions issued by the Government of Haryana on 8. 5. 1995. After some correspondence and calling upon the petitioner to furnish some information, the respondent No. 2 examined the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment and rejected it vide Annexure 'p-8' on the ground that income of the family of the petitioner is more than Rs. 2,500/per month.

(3.) AFTER having considered the submissions of the learned counsel we have not been able to find any irregularity in the decision taken by the respondent No. 2. None of the documents filed along with the writ petition gives an inkling of the dependency of the petitioner on his mother late Smt. Shano Devi nor any material has been produced before the Court to show that two brothers of the petitioners are not living with the family and, therefore, the income of the two brothers cannot be taken into consideration for the determination of the family income.