AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rajiv Sharma, J.—Case of the Petitioner has not been considered by the Respondents since she had attained the age of 35 years and her name has not been sponsored by the employment exchange. A Division Bench of this Court on same or similar facts has directed the Respondents in CWP No. 2453 of 1995, decided on 1st May, 1996 to consider the case of the Petitioner dehors the policy decision for appointment on daily wages. The operative portion of the judgment reads thus:
We are of the opinion that the cases of all the writ Petitioners have to be considered sympathetically. We say so, as in view of the age bar, they will not be able to get any employment in government service. Therefore, we direct the Respondents to consider the case of the Petitioners dehors the policy decision Annexure PA for appointment on daily wages. For this purpose, the Petitioners shall file another representation(s) within two months from today, which shall be disposed of within two months thereafter.
Petitioner''s case is at par with the Petitioners, who had filed CWP No. 2453 of 1995. Consequently, there shall be direction to the Respondents to consider the case of the Petitioner in view of the judgment rendered by this Court on 1st May, 1996 in CWP No. 2453 of 1995. The Petitioner''s case shall be considered within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this judgment. She will not be entitled to any back wages in case she is offered appointment.
Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, the petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs.