Dinesh Kumar vs State of H.P. and Another

Deepak Gupta, J.—The short point involved in this case is whether the Petitioner who has been granted compassionate appointment on account of the death of his father was entitled to regular appointment or daily-wage appointment as offered to him.

The undisputed facts are that Sh. Gopal Dutt, father of the Petitioner, was working as Work Charged Mate with the Respondent-Department. He expired on 16.10.2004 and thereafter the Petitioner filed an application Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 seeking employment on compassionate grounds. When such employment was not granted to him he filed O.A. No. 564 of 2006 praying that a direction be issued to the Respondent to grant him compassionate employment. Thereafter, the Petitioner was offered appointment of Clerk on daily-wage basis vide letter dated 27th April, 2007. In this letter, it was clearly stated that this offer of appointment was being made only if the Petitioner is willing to accept the appointment on daily-wage basis as a clerk. The Petitioner not only accepted the appointment but thereafter withdrew the O.A. filed by him. At that time the Petitioner did not seek leave of the Tribunal to rake up the issue that he was entitled to regular appointment. Not only this, it appears that the Petitioner was already registered as a D-Class Contractor and after he was offered such appointment he prayed that he may be de-registered as D-Class Contractor.

The Petitioner who has voluntarily accepted the appointment on daily-wage basis now cannot turn around and claim that he should have been granted appointment on regular basis.

In view of the above discussion, there is no merit in the petition which is accordingly dismissed. No costs.