JAIVIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The father of the petitioner was working as Constable with respondent No. 4. He expired on 16.10.1991 while he was on duty. The petitioner was an infant at that time, just 1-1/2 year old. His mother applied for keeping one post reserved for him after he attains the age of majority. She was informed by respondent No. 4 to submit the application within one year after the petitioner attains the age of majority. On 11.7.2007 the petitioner completed the age of 17 years. He immediately applied for compassionate appointment as per the assurance (Annexure P-4) given in the year 1992 but even after visiting the respondents many a time nothing has been done. His prayer for financial assistance as per 2006 policy has also not been adhered to.

(2.) In the written statement the respondents have averred that the claim of the petitioner is not covered under the ex gratia scheme of 2006 as also the same is time barred.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in the year 2003, Government of Haryana framed rules/regulations on compassionate appointments and also made a provision for grant of assistance to the tune of Rs. 2.50 lakh in case the family of the deceased Government employee opts for the same or there is no vacancy to be offered to the dependents. It is further stated that in the year 2005, the Government again framed rules regarding appointment on compassionate ground. The lump sum amount of financial compensation was increased to Rs. 5.00 lacs. As matters stand, neither she or her son was given a job nor the lump sum assistance, which has resulted in the filing of this writ petition.