KIRAN JYOTI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Father of the petitioner was serving as driver with the Municipal Council, Hoshiarpur and died in harness on 28.3.2002. The petitioner claims that he was the only bread earner in the family. Immediately, after death of the deceased employee, petitioner made an application on 7.8.2002 for her appointment on compassionate grounds for the post of Clerk having 10+2 qualification. This request for appointment was on the basis of the State Government policy for compassionate appointment as notified vide Circular dated 20.1.1997. The respondents, however, appointed the petitioner as Class IV employee vide order dated 29.6.2004. The petitioner joined the post on her appointment. It is alleged that the petitioner being in immediate need of the financial assistance, joined the post. It is further alleged that the petitioner came to know about the appointment of one Rekha on the post of Clerk in the month of September, 2004. Accordingly, she made a representation for consideration of her case for appointment as Clerk in October, 2004, Another representation seems to have been made on 16.5.2006 which was followed by a legal notice dated 14.10.2006. Seeing no response, the petitioner approached this Court by filing CWP No. 6653/2007 which came to be disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court on 4.5.2007 with the following directions :-

(2.) Consequent upon the aforesaid directions, the respondents have passed the impugned order dated 3.7.2007 rejecting the claim of the petitioner for giving her appointment on the higher post of Clerk. The claim has been rejected primarily on two grounds that after her appointment on probation for two years, the petitioner applied for confirmation and it was only after her confirmation that the petitioner tried to raise the issue of appointment on higher post and during all this period, she remained mum. The respondents have also given certain instances where similarly situated persons were given Class IV appointment. Regarding the appointment of Rekha as Clerk, it has been mentioned that she was B.A. 2nd Year whereas the petitioner was only 10+2.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length.