Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 718 (HP)

VEENA DEVI v. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2010-04-09

RAJIV SHARMA

body2010
JUDGMENT Rajiv Sharma, J.-Petitioner has assailed the appointment of respondent No.4 to the post of Part Time Water Carrier in Government Primary School, Bhel. Petitioner is a divorcee. She has got her name registered with the Employment Exchange, Arki. She is residing with her father Sh. Govind Ram at village Bhel. Case of petitioner, in a nutshell, is that petitioner was more deserving vis-à-vis respondent No.4. 2. Mr. S.R. Chauan has vehemently argued that appointment of respondent No.4 as Part Time Water Carrier in Government Primary School, Bhel is illegal, arbitrary and thus violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. He then contended that respondent No.4 is a widow but her son is running a taxi and producing vegetables from five bighas of irrigated land. 3. Mr. R. K. Sharma, learned Senior Additional Advocate General and Mr. Trilok Jamwal have supported the appointment of respondent No.4 to the post of Part Time Water Carrier. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully. 5. Appointment to the post of Part Time Water Carrier is made as per the Scheme framed by the respondent-State. According to clause 12 of the Scheme, State Government can make appointment on compassionate grounds from the category of widow, woman deserted by her husband or otherwise destitute, handicapped person and candidates who fall below poverty line defined by the Rural Development Department from time to time. It appears from the record that respondent No.4 has submitted application for considering her candidature for the post of Part Time Water Carrier. State Government approved her appointment and consequently Deputy Directory of Elementary Education, Solan requested the Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Basantpur on 22.6.2007 to issue appointment order in favour of respondent No.4. Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Basantpur vide his letter dated 3.7.2007 issued appointment order in favour of respondent No.4. Necessary agreement was also executed by respondent No.4. She has joined her duties on 3.7.2007. Respondent No.4 is a widow. Her husband died on 15.8.2005. She belongs to BPL family and no member from her family is employed in Government or semi-Government job as per certificates placed on record by respondents No.1 to 3. Income of respondent No.4 is about Rs. 5,000/- per annum. 6. It is evident from the facts enumerated hereinabove that respondent No.4 is more deserving being a widow. She belongs to BPL family and no member from her family is employed in Government or semi-Government job as per certificates placed on record by respondents No.1 to 3. Income of respondent No.4 is about Rs. 5,000/- per annum. 6. It is evident from the facts enumerated hereinabove that respondent No.4 is more deserving being a widow. Accordingly, there is no illegality in the action of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to appoint respondent No.4 to the post of Part Time Water Carrier in Government Primary School, Bhel. 7. Consequently, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed. No costs.