Rajiv Sharma, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel, who has accepted notice on behalf of opposite parties No. 1 to 5. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of finally at the admission stage itself.
(2.) THROUGH the instant writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the orders dated 29.1.2009, 8.12.2008, 23.1.2008 and 18.12.2007 passed by the opposite parties Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively, to the writ petition. Late Kuldip Shukla, husband of the petitioner, was a permanent Government Servant and while working as Ward Boy in the Community Health Centre, he left for heavenly aboard on 15.4.2004. After the death of the husband, the petitioner, who is Intermediate and having knowledge of Typing, applied for appointment on the prescribed format for the post of Junior Clerk. The Superintendent of the Health Centre forwarded the said application to the Chief Medical Officer on 12.7.2006, who in turn, forwarded the same to the Director General Medical & Health Services. Late Kuldip Shukla left behind the petitioner and two minor children. Instead of giving appointment to the petitioner on compassionate ground under the Dying -in -Harness Rules, 1974, the petitioner was required to appear in the test.
(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner contends that the appointment under the Dying -in -Harness Rules, 1974 is given to the member of the deceased family on the basis of the qualification of the candidate without requiring him to appear in the Test. To support his argument, Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the Government Order dated 22.6.1984 of the State Government, which provides that one person of the deceased family will be given appointment on the post of outside the purview of Public Service Commission on the basis of qualification. Therefore, the petitioner should have been given on the post of Junior Clerk as requirement for the post of Junior Clerk is only Intermediate.;