NARESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Issue notice. Mr.J.K. Verma, learned Deputy Advocate General, waives notice for the respondents.

(2.) The grievance projected in this writ petition, by the petitioner, is that the father of the petitioner, who was working as Junior Engineer in HPPWD, died on 5.12.2003, while in service, constraining the petitioner to file application for appointment on compassionate ground, which was rejected on the ground that the family income of the petitioner exceeds the ceiling fixed by the Government on 17.1.2013, constraining the petitioner to file this writ petition.

(3.) This Court in the latest decision, dated 6th October, 2015, passed in CWP No.9094 of 2013, titled Surinder Kumar vs. State of H.P. and others, and other connected matters, while dealing with the issue of compassionate appointment, after referring to various . decisions of the Apex Court, has held that grant of terminal benefits and income from family pension cannot be equated with the employment assistance on compassionate ground. It has further been held that once there is no maximum income slab provided in the Scheme, the claim of the applicant cannot be rejected on that score. It is apt to reproduce paragraphs 46 to 55 of the said decision hereunder: