DUBKI DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been preferred for getting compassionate appointment, because of the deceased of the husband of the present petitioner, who was working with the respondents. The husband of the petitioner expired on 6th February, 2002. The petitioner has also preferred an application under the Workman's Compensation Act. The petitioner was paid compensation and it was assured that compassionate appointment will be given to the petitioner and hence this writ petition has been preferred.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3, who has submitted that, in fact, husband of the petitioner was not an employee of respondent nos. 2 and 3. This plea has been taken in paragraph no.5 of the counter affidavit, filed on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3. Moreover, respondent no.2, the company, is not viable and, therefore, since the year, 1996 a Voluntary Retirement Scheme has already been floated and no fresh appointment has been made, as per respondent nos. 2 and 3. Moreover, much time has also lapsed after the husband of the petitioner has expired and hence the prayer, as made in the memo of petition, cannot be granted, as per the submission of learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3 and, thereby, the writ petition deserved to be dismissed.

(3.) AS a cumulative effect of the aforesaid facts, reasons and judicial pronouncements, there is no substance in this writ petition and hence the same is hereby dismissed.