HARBHAJAN KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 4.11.1993 (Annexure P-1) wherein the Government had directed that the candidates already appointed on compassionate ground should not be reconsidered for higher post due to their improved qualification. Challenge is also laid to the instructions dated 29.11.1989 (Annexure P-2) wherein instructions have been issued for appointment of member of the family of a person killed in terrorist action on class III or IV post on priority basis. Further prayer of the petitioner is for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to issue appointment letter on compassionate grounds to the petitioner as Assistant Sub Inspector on account of death of her husband at the hands of terrorists as per policy of the Government since the petitioner had acquired requisite qualification.

(2.) The pleaded case of the petitioner is that her husband was working as Sub Inspector and was posted as Additional S.H.O., Police Station Sadar, Batala in the month of January, 1990. While chasing the terrorists, he was killed on 10.1.1990 and the FIR No.12 was also lodged under Sections 302/307/148/149 IPC, 25/54/59 of Arms Act, 4/5 Indian Explosive Act and 3/4/5 of TADA Act at Police Station Sadar, Batala.

(3.) In the written statement of respondent no.4, it was pleaded that as per instruction Annexure P-1, if a candidate had already obtained the appointment on compassionate ground, he cannot again apply for another post on compassionate grounds and, therefore, the case of the petitioner could not be reconsidered for appointment as ASI as she had already been appointed as Constable on compassionate grounds. The petitioner never fulfilled basic qualifications for the appointment as ASI at that point of time nor she applied for relaxation in the qualifications.