- (1.) The petitioner has a grievance that she has not been given family pension for the death of her husband during service. The petitioner also claimed that she is entitled to compassionate appointment. The contention in defence is that the petitioner was not reported to have died and it was simply a case where he did not report for duty since 28.07.2004 and there was nothing on record to show that he had died in order that the claim for compassionate assistance could be made by the petitioner. The claim for family pension was also not tenable, since the petitioner's husband was not a regular employee of the respondent-Corporation.
(2.) At the previous hearing on 03.04.2012, I had directed the counsel for the respondents to take instructions on the vacancy position against compassionate appointment quota on the basis that a civil death must be presumed to have taken place on the completion of 7 years following his disappearance in 2004. The learned counsel for the respondents states that there are only 40 vacancies in Class-IV posts and 5% of the same being the quota for compensate assistance, the appointment could be made only for filling-up of 2 vacancies. As against this, there are 10 applications lying for consideration under this quota and if the petitioner's claim must be ranked in the order of seniority, she will be placed at 11 and she could not, therefore, merit consideration of compassionate appointment. These informations have not been brought through any records, but I have merely stated the respondents' stand as evident that the petitioner cannot be considered for compassionate appointment against the available vacancies meant for that purpose.
(3.) As regards the petitioner's claim for family pension, the petitioner's contention is that her husband must be treated as a regular appointee in terms of the State policy spelt out through the circular issued on 11.09.1996 by the Chandigarh Administration, Department of Personnel to all the Heads of the Departments of Chandigarh Administration. It exhorts all officials to prepare the list of employees, who had completed 240 days of continuous service in a year and the persons, who have not been regularized, should be entitled to the minimum scale prescribed for the post with 60% of the DA at Punjab pattern. The letter directs that all the Heads of the Departments should keep in mind the instructions while regularizing the services of daily/casual employees. A subsequent circular directs that the recruitment against Group 'D' posts shall be made from amongst the work-charged daily workers and if the workers possess the required educational qualification prescribed under the relevant recruitment rules which have to be considered for such regularization. There have been also some instructions from the Chandigarh Administration on 24.03.2008 subsequent to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi, I do not feel constrained to refer to them as relevant for this case, since by that time, the Civil Writ Petition No.16556 of 2011 (O&M) petitioner's husband had gone missing and the question of consideration under this instruction may have itself no value.;