Allowed

Hans Raj v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC2 May 2013LPA/481/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Letters Patent Appeal, two-judge bench modified the Single Judge's summary dismissal of a writ petition. The court directed the Corporation to reconsider the appellant's unaddressed 2004 representation regarding compassionate appointment or alternative financial relief under Government Policies.

What did the court decide?

The Court directed the Corporation to consider the appellant's representation dated 15.1.2004, grant entitlement relief if applicable, or pass a speaking order within 4 months.

Hans Raj Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

LPA No. 481 of 2013

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

LPA No. 481 of 2013 (O&M)

¶5

Date of decision: 02.05.2013

Hans Raj

..... Appellant

Versus

State of Haryana and others

¶10

..... Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.P. NAGRATH

¶12

PRESENT: Mr. Ved Parkash, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.

¶13

SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)

¶14

This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated 25.1.2013, whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant has been dismissed on account of delay and latches. Since the learned Single Judge has passed a summary order, we propose to notice the facts briefly.

¶15

The father of the appellant was a Chowkidar in the respondent-Corporation when he died while in service on 10.10.1998. The appellant is said to have applied in the year 2000 for his appointment on compassionate grounds under the Ex-Gratia Policy. After some correspondence regarding submission of documents etc., the respondent-

¶16

LPA No. 481 of 2013 -2-

¶17

Corporation rejected the claim of the appellant vide order dated 1.5.2003 (Annexure P-2). On the ground that the income of the family of the deceased was more than 6000/- per month, hence he was ineligible as per the Government Policy adopted by the Corporation. The impugned order, however, does not reveal whether or not the alternative relief i.e. financial assistance of 2.5 lacs as per the Government Policy adopted by the Corporation was granted to the appellant and his family. It further appears that the appellant made a fresh representation to the respondentCorporation on 15.1.2004 (Annexure P-4) pointing out that as per the subsequent Government Instructions (Annexure P-3) the condition of monthly income of the family was inapplicable.

¶18

The learned Single Judge, however, declined to go into this aspect of the matter and dismissed the writ petition in limine.

¶19

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant, we are of the considered view that if there is a pre-condition that the family income should not be more than ` 6000/- per month for the purpose of employment under the old policy, such a condition cannot be relaxed in the case of the appellant. However, if the Competent Authority itself has relaxed such condition, as claimed by the appellant, or if the family of the deceased employee is entitled to an alternative relief, the same cannot be denied to the appellant particularly when he raised a fresh claim in the year 2004 which was not decided by the respondents. Consequently, we modify the order dated 25.1.2013, passed by learned Single Judge and direct the respondent-Corporation to consider the subsequent representation dated 15.1.2004 (Annexure P-4) of the appellant in the

¶20

LPA No. 481 of 2013 -3-

¶21

light of the Government Policies and if the family of the deceased is found entitled to any relief, to grant the same and/or pass a speaking order within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶22

Disposed of.

¶23

( SURYA KANT ) JUDGE

¶24

May 02, 2013	( R.P. NAGRATH )
rishu	JUDGE

Hans Raj v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hans Raj v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Court on Its Own Motion Vs Shamsher Singh and Anr. R/O Vill. Mundlana Distt. Sonepat

Gmada Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Gram Panchayat Qutabewal Gujjaran Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Rattan Lal and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sanjeev Gupta Vs Sonia Gupta & Anr.

Daljit Kaur Vs State of Punjab & Ors.