Kamal Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Others on 20 December, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Kamal Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Others on 20 December, 2024

                                  Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171618




CWP-34777-2024               1


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH

137                                       CWP-34777-2024
                                          Date of Decision : 20.12.2024


KAMAL KUMAR                                           .... PETITIONER

                          V/S

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS                           .... RESPONDENTS


CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Present :   Mr.Vivek Aggarwal, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

                   ****

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles

226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order

dated 19.05.2023 (Annexure P-11) whereby respondent has rejected his

claim for compassionate appointment.

2. Father of petitioner joined respondent-Uttar Haryana Bijli

Vitran Nigam Ltd. as Peon. He passed away on 29.05.2004 while in

harness. His wife applied to respondent for retiral/terminal dues of her

deceased husband. The respondent released following benefits/claims to

wife of the deceased:

1. Payment of leave encashment sanctioned vide O/o No.138

dated 08.07.2004 and Rs. 67,770/- released vide cheque No.

113282 dated 12.08.2004.

2. Gratuity Rs. 1,10,134/- vide GPO No. 2852/UHBVNL

1 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 23-12-2024 21:43:57 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171618

CWP-34777-2024 2

dated 30.12.2004 vide cheque No. 133720 dated 27.01.2005.

3. Family Pension released vide PPO No. 2916/UHBVN

dated 30.12.2004.

4. Ex-gratia grant for Rs. 25,000/- sanctioned vide O/o No.

275/M-292/EG-216 dated 03.05.2005 and released vide

cheque No. 140411 dated 24.08.2004.

5. Final payment of GPF of Rs. 1,16,053/- released vide

Cheque No. 113306 dated 24.08.2004.

6. Ex-Gratia compensation financial Assistance for Rs. 2.5

lacs, sanctioned by the office of Under Secretary/GA,

UHBVN, Panchkula O/o No. 542/UH/Pen/E-916 dated

13.09.2007 and released vide cheque No. 287011 dated

08.10.2007.

3. The petitioner’s mother expired on 12.02.2021. After her

death, the petitioner filed representation dated 28.07.2022 (Annexure

P-9) before authorities seeking compassionate appointment. He preferred

CWP No.26203 of 2022 before this Court which was disposed of vide

order dated 17.11.2022 with a direction to take decision on the

representation dated 28.07.2022 (Annexure P-9). The respondent has

passed impugned order dated 19.05.2023 pursuant to order dated

17.11.2022 of this Court.

4. Mr. Aggarwal submits that the petitioner is entitled to

compassionate appointment. His claim was considered by authorities in

2005, however his mother was paid lump sum compensation instead of

compassionate appointment. He is also entitled to payment of GIS

2 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 23-12-2024 21:43:57 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171618

CWP-34777-2024 3

(Group Insurance Scheme), however, respondent has not released the

same.

5. I have heard the arguments of counsel for the petitioner and

perused the record.

6. Concededly, petitioner’s father passed away on 30.12.2004

and his mother on 12.02.2021. The mother of petitioner claimed dues of

her husband. She during 2004-07 was paid all the terminal dues including

ex-gratia compensation to the tune of Rs.2.5 lakhs. She did not raise any

objection during her lifetime. It appears that after the death of his

mother, the petitioner wants to make hay while the Sun shines.

Compassionate appointment is neither a fundamental nor a vested right.

The object of compassionate appointment is to prevent the dependents of

an employee from being driven to destitution. The petitioner’s mother

had already availed all the benefits relating to her husband’s service. The

petitioner has come up for compassionate appointment after the expiry of

more than 15 years. It is apt to notice that impugned order rejecting

compassionate appointment was passed in May’2023 and he has

preferred present petition in December’ 2024. These facts collectively

indicate that he is not in destitution deserving compassionate

appointment. He is also claiming benefit of GIS. The respondent in the

impugned order has observed that the said benefit has to be released by

LIC. The petitioner is claiming that he is not having requisite documents

and it is the respondent who can get the said benefit released. The

respondent No.2 is requested to consider claim of petitioner and help him

to get benefit of GIS from LIC.

3 of 4
::: Downloaded on – 23-12-2024 21:43:57 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:171618

CWP-34777-2024 4

7. Disposed of in above terms.

                                             (JAGMOHAN BANSAL)
                                                  JUDGE
20.12.2024
anju


             Whether speaking/reasoned          : Yes/No
             Whether Reportable                 : Yes/No




                                  4 of 4
             ::: Downloaded on - 23-12-2024 21:43:57 :::