- (1.) This order shall dispose of a bunch of writ petitions SC have been preferred by various petitioners. However, the facts have been referred from CWP No. 4303 of 2009. The question of law, which has been referred to this Full Bench for decision is as regards the rules which would be applicable to Government employees who seek compassionate appointment whether it would be the rules in operation at the time of death of the employee or the rules applicable on the date when case is considered by the appropriate authority. In view of conflicting views by various Division Benches, the case has been referred to the Full Bench. Some facts necessary for decision of the case are being noticed here: Petitioner's husband, who had been working as Junior Engineer in Haryana Irrigation Department, expired on 23rd February, 1995. On 5th May, 1995, she moved an application to respondent department for providing employment on compassionate grounds to her only son namely, Manoj Kumar, who at that time was seven years old. A letter was thereafter addressed from the Superintending Engineer, Narnaul requesting that a post be kept reserved for the minor child of the widow in order to consider his case on attaining majority. In the year 2005, petitioner moved an application that her son be considered for appointment on compassionate ground as he had attained age of 17 years and was going to appear in B.A. final year examination. She relied upon letter, Annexure P-2 and instructions issued by Government dated 27th March, 1991. However, application was rejected by the respondents vide their letter dated 18th August, 2006. The petitioner protested and sent representations. However, stand of respondents remained the same. They communicated to the petitioner that there was no provision for employment under new policy dated 3rd August, 2006, thus petitioner was at liberty to opt for financial assistance under the new scheme which would be considered by the department. Aggrieved, petitioner preferred the instant petition before this Court.
(2.) In view of number of cases in which similar question arose and there being conflicting views of various Division Benches, matter was referred to Full Bench by the Single Judge. Needless to observe that facts of each case vary. We have noticed facts from one case, as referred to above.
(3.) Learned Counsel representing the petitioners, referred to the view taken by this Court in two Division Benches in case titled as Lalit Sharma v. State of Haryana, in CWP No. 6890 of 2007 decided on 11.7.2008 and Sheela Devi v. State of Haryana and another in CWP No. 8844 of 2007 decided on 22.8.2008, and contended that judgments delivered therein contained the correct view. Policy of compassionate appointment being in the nature of a social welfare measure needed liberal interpretation. Thus, the scheme/policy applicable on date of death of the employee should be the relevant for consideration of case of his dependant for appointment on compassionate basis. According to them, the Apex Court in its recent judgment reported as Bhawani Prasad Sonkar v. Union of India and others, 2011 4 SCC 209 has taken the same view.;