Tannishtha Singh Th. Vimla v. State Of Haryana And Others

CWP-12373-2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-12373-2024 Date of decision: 20.08.2024 Tannishtha Singh through Vimla

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** Present :

Ms. Aakriti Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Dushyant Saharan, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Amit Bansal, Advocate for respondent No.5. ***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral) 1.

Learned counsel submits that the mother of the petitioner was working as Junior Basic Teacher and unfortunately passed away due to heart attack on 24.03.2022, leaving behind the petitioner-her daughter and respondent No.5-her husband. The petitioner had lodged FIR No.0630, dated 25.06.2022 under Section 75 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and 323, 34, 506, 509 IPC, against her father-respondent No.5 and is living with her maternal grandparents, who are bearing the expenses for her college education. An application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance has also been filed by her, which is pending and the Family Court, Hisar has directed respondent No.5 to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- to her and the same has not been paid as yet. She is yet to attain the age of 18 years on 08.06.

2025, her date of birth being 08.06.2007 and is aspiring to be appointed on compassionate grounds under the Haryana Civil Services (Compassionate Financial Assistance and Appointment) Rules, 2019, in terms of which an application for the said purpose has to be submitted by her within HAMANT 2024.08.

CWP-12373-2024 6 months of having attained the age of 18 years. However in the impugned order dated 22.04.2024, Annexure P-7, it has been wrongly observed that she has not submitted her application within 6 months of attaining the age of 18 years, which she as a matter of fact has not even attained and instructions have been issued to provide monthly financial assistance to the dependents of the deceased employee, which the learned counsel apprehends would be granted to respondent No.5 thereby taking away her right of consideration for appointment on the compassionate basis.

2.

Mr. Surender Singh-respondent No.5, appears in person alongwith his learned counsel and makes a statement that he will not be claiming the monthly financial assistance under the said policy and is himself keen that the appointment on compassionate grounds is granted to his daughter-the petitioner.

3.

This satisfies the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4.

Learned State counsel undertakes to apprise the department concerned about this order.

5.

Disposed of accordingly.

(AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 20.08.2024 Hemant Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No HAMANT 2024.08.21 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment