- (1.) The petitioner to an extent is an unfortunate person, who lost his father on 13.012.1997. The petitioner had a qualification of B.Com with computer course. As per the policy framed by the respondents, the petitioner was eligible for ex-gratia appointment. Father of the petitioner was drawing a scale of Rs. 5000-8000 w.e.f. 01.01.1996. The petitioner was offered an appointment of LDC under ex-gratia scheme. His grievance is that this offer was made to him without considering his qualification and the policy applicable.
(2.) Counsel would refer to the policy of ex-gratia appointment followed by the respondents to say that the petitioner was entitled to be appointed at one grade lower than the grade enjoyed by his father. Counsel for the petitioner contends that he was eligible for appointment as UDC instead of LDC.
(3.) Concededly the petitioner had accepted this offer when made to him in the year 1998. The petitioner had continued to serve Civil Writ Petition No.904 of 2010 -2- as LDC and his turn came for promotion to the post of UDC in the year 2004. The petitioner was promoted as UDC in 2006. Even thereafter, the petitioner has slept over his rights for too long. The petitioner has now filed writ petition to pray that he should have been appointed as UDC in the year 1998 after 13 years. The petitioner pleads that the initial appointment given to him of LDC was bad. The prayer is that he should now be given appointment of UDC w.e.f. 1998 with all the consequential benefits.;