SAVITRI DEVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A widow has filed this petition to seek relief of ex-gratia amount of Rs. five lacs under Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2005 (for short "2005 Rules") on account of death of her husband. She herself is in the employment of Government. Question, thus, to be seen is whether she would be entitled to seek this ex-gratia compassionate assistance under the Rules or not.

(2.) Husband of the petitioner, Giarsi Lal, was employed as a Class IV employee (Sweeper) in Police Department and was serving at Police Line, Narnaul. He died on 24.2.2006, statedly after serving for about 54 years. The petitioner thereafter applied for job for her son under ex-gratia scheme and in the alternative she asked for ex-gratia assistance. The petitioner claims that she has made number of rounds to the office of Superintendent of Police, Narnaul and had even gone to the office of D.G.P., Haryana but has not got any satisfactory reply. On 18.5.2006, the petitioner gave a written application in the office of D.G.P. for grant of job under ex-gratia scheme to her son. Neither the job has been given to the son of the petitioner nor any ex-gratia benefit otherwise released in her favour. The petitioner then served a legal notice for providing job on compassionate ground or financial assistance, which has now been replied on 19.2.2009. The petitioner has now been informed that she is already employed with Municipal Council, Narnaul, and she, thus, is not entitled to grant of job under ex-gratia scheme, her total emoluments being 6987/-. The petitioner has accordingly impugned this communication seeking direction for ex-gratia assistance of Rs. five lacs.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents ought to have paid the financial assistance to the petitioner as she would be entitled to the same in terms of Rule 4 of 2005 Rules. The counsel would refer to the provisions of Rule 4(1), which makes a provision for preference of option to be furnished within six months from the date of death of the Government employee praying for either ex-gratia appointment on compassionate ground or alternatively ex-gratia financial assistance to the family of the deceased. The reading of this Rule would clearly show that ex-gratia appointment on compassionate grounds to a member of the family is for one who was "completely dependent" on the deceased employee and is in extreme financial distress due to the loss of the deceased. Similar is the position for payment of ex-gratia financial assistance which is in alternative to the ex-gratia appointment on compassionate ground. The condition of extreme financial distress due to the loss of deceased would equally apply for ex-gratia compassionate financial assistance as is the requirement in case of ex-gratia appointment on compassionate ground. Analysis of Rule 4.1 (a) and (b) would make it appear so, which is reproduced below :-