(1.) The present appeal arises from order dated 09.09.2013 dismissing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10467/2013 declining to interfere with the order dated 04.07.2013 rejecting the claim for compassionate appointment.
(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in every case of untimely death of a Government employee, financial benefits flow to the family of the deceased according to the service rules. That per se cannot be a ground to deny compassionate appointment as also held by the Supreme Court in more than one judgment. There is nothing in the order dated 04.07.2013 to indicate that the respondents had any parameters or index on basis of which any rational assessment was made before declining compassionate appointment because of monetary service benefits given to the family of the deceased under the service rules. No property or other sources of income exists. The claim has been rejected on conjectures and surmises that the deceased must have also made investments in his life time which is factually wrong. Adverting to the second ground that the deceased had only nine months of service left, it was submitted that it was all the more reason as the family was going to be left with no income and the appellant had a brother and his mother to look after with no sources of income as he was unemployed.
(3.) We have considered the submissions on behalf of the appellant.