107 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA-1469-2025(O&M) Date of Decision: 16.05.2025 Vijay Kumar . . . . Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and Others. . . . . Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ALOK JAIN Present: - Mr. Kapil Kakkar, Advocate, Mr. Shreesh Kakkar, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Arundhati Kulshreshtha, AAG, Punjab. SUDHIR SINGH, J. CM-3594-LPA-2025 For the reasons given in the application, the same is allowed and delay of 16 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Main Case Challenge in the present intra Court appeal is to the order dated 24.03.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed. 2. Before the learned Single Judge, the appellant had laid challenge to the order dated 12.06.2020 vide which his claim of compassionate appointment was rejected. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has vehemently submitted that after the death of mother of the appellant on 04.06.2019 during her services, there is no breadwinner in the family of the appellant and Poonam 2025.07.03 23:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document LPA-1469-2025 besides that the appellant and his family do not have any source of income nor any land is possessed by them. Learned counsel makes a specific reference to Annexure P-3 in support of the aforesaid contention. It is further argued that the compassionate appointment is granted to tide over the situation of the family of the deceased employee and the respondent- authorities are well within their right to even grant relaxation to a candidate, while granting compassionate appointment. 4. At this stage, Ms. Arundhati Kulshreshtha, AAG Punjab present in the court accepts notice on behalf of the respondents and states that if the matter is remitted to the respondent-authorities, the same shall be considered sympathetically, after taking into consideration the aforesaid factual position, particularly the one indicated in Annexure P-3. 5. In view of the above, we set aside the order dated 24.03.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge and remit the matter to the respondent- authorities for its consideration on sympathetic ground. Needless to say that the compassionate appointment being part of a welfare scheme of the state, we hope that respondent-authorities shall take an appropriate and sympathetic decision in the case of the petitioner. 6. In view of the above, the present appeal is disposed of 7. Pending application, if any, shall also stand disposed of. 16.05.2025 poonam (SUDHIR SINGH) JUDGE (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/no Whether reportable? Yes/no Poonam 2025.07.03 23:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document