217 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP-4303-2020 (O&M) Date of Decision: 31.07.2025 Anju Sharma and Another ...Petitioners Versus Union Territory Chandigarh and Another ...Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mrs. Anupam Bhanot, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ashish Rawal, Advocate for the respondents. **** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking setting aside of order dated 04.12.2019 whereby they have been relieved from service w.e.f. 12.12.2019. 2. Affidavit of Sh. Ajay Chagthi, IAS, Chief Executive Officer, Chandigarh Housing Board, Chandigarh has been filed in the Court today, which is taken on record. 3. The petitioners are real sisters. Their father Mr. Vinod Kumar while working as Sectional Officer (Mechanical) with respondent No.2 passed away in harness. The respondent appointed petitioners on contract basis. Their appointment was not made against their claim for compassionate appointment whereas their appointment was made under Pradhan Mantri Awas Yogna. They were appointed as Computer PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.07.31 17:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-4303-2020 (O&M) -2- Operator/Data Entry Operator. As per policy decision, the respondent on account of non-availability of work relieved them on 12.12.2019. 4. Mrs. Anupam Bhanot, Advocate submits that petitioners are eligible for compassionate appointment. They were wrongly appointed as contractual employee. The respondent as per policy of compassionate appointment was bound to appoint them as regular employee. 5. Per contra, Mr. Ashish Rawal, Advocate submits that respondent has not rejected claim of petitioners. As per policy of compassionate appointment, one dependent can be offered regular job. The respondent has prepared list of applicants who had applied as per policy of compassionate appointment. The name of petitioner No.2 figures at serial No.13. As soon as her turn would come, she would be offered appointment letter subject to her eligibility. 6. The petitioners were appointed as contractual employees and their appointment was not as per policy of compassionate appointment. The respondent has duly recorded name of petitioner No.2 in the list of applicants. She would certainly be considered for the post as soon as her turn would come subject to compliance of other conditions. 7. Disposed of. 8. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 31.07.2025 Prince Chawla Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PRINCE CHAWLA 2025.07.31 17:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document