Ajay Rastogi, J. - (1.) Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner with the grievance that his initial appointment vide order dt.16.03.1992 (Annx.1) being on compassionate basis that may be considered to be his regular appointment and he may also get same parity as has been granted to one of the incumbent Girdhari Lal who too was appointed on compassionate grounds along with him by common order dt.16.03.1992 and lateron given regular appointment from the date of his initial appointment i.e.16.03.1992 vide order dt.25.01.2010 (Annx.A6) and action of the respondent in not maintaining parity amongst the persons appointed by common order under compassionate grounds is violative of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution.
(2.) The petitioner was initially appointed on compassionate ground on daily wage basis as LDC vide order dt.16.03.1992 however given regular appointment vide order dt.24.04.1995 in the regular pay-scale and placed on probation. The petitioner raised grievance that Girdhari Lal who was appointed along him on compassionate ground vide order dt.16.03.1992 (Annx.1), after intervention of the learned trial court and on the basis of the decree passed in his favour was granted regular appointment from the date of his first appointment i.e. 16.03.1992 by the respondent vide order dt.25.01.2010 (Annx.A6) and seniority was accordingly assigned to him, the petitioner may also be treated to be regular appointee from the date of his initial appointment i.e.16.03.1992.
(3.) Counsel for petitioner submits that while examining the similar controversy the Division Bench of this Court in State of Raj. & Anr. v. Ajay Sharma, RLW (Raj) 2 (2003) 1070 held that the appointees on compassionate grounds are regular appointees and taking note thereof the coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP-5242/2001 (Smt. Sita Devi v. District & Sessions Judge & Anr) held that appointees on compassionate grounds are regular appointees and taking assistance thereof counsel submits that petitioner may be treated to be regular appointee from the date of his initial appointment w.e.f.16.03.1992 and is also entitled to claim parity with that of Girdhari Lal who was considered to be regular appointee from the date of his initial appointment (16.03.1992) vide order dt.25.01.2010, may be by the intervention of the Court, denial thereof is in violation of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution.;