STATE AND ANOTHER Vs. GULL (MASARAT)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since Mr. Amin has accepted the notice in the main appeal also, we take it for consideration.

(2.) Respondent-Masarat Gull (hereinafter to be referred to as 'petitioner') filed SWP No. 1577/2011 seeking Writ of Mandamus, commanding the appellant/State (respondent before the Writ Court) to consider her case for Compassionate Appointment in terms of J&K Compassionate Appointment Rules (SRO 43 of 1994) and appoint her against any available vacancy. State resisted the writ petition vis-a-vis her appointment only on the ground that her case was duly considered in terms of rules, but approved for cash compensation only in terms of SRO 199 dated 4th of July, 2008, as such rejected her claim for appointment into Government job, instead directed payment of cash compensation vide communication dated 10th of February, 2010 made by Deputy Secretary to Government, General Administration Department (For short GAD) to Deputy Commissioner, Anantnag, appellant No. 2 herein which was challenged by the petitioner vide SWP No. 1577/2011.

(3.) The petitioner asserted before the Writ Court that, in terms of SRO 199 dated 4th of July, 2008, the person, who seeks compassionate appointment in terms of SRO 43 of 1994, has to opt either for Government Service or for cash compensation and once she had not opted for cash compensation and put forth her claim for Government Service only, the said relief could not be denied to her on the touchstone of SRO 43 of 1994 [Refer JKS Soft JKS/460]. It was further urged by the petitioner that the Government has already issued appointment orders in terms of SRO 43 of 1994 even in relaxation of age bars in favour of some of the persons after coming into being SRO 199 dated 4th of July, 2008 [Refer 2008 (7) JKS JK-44], whereas her case has been singled out.