Ext.P11, by which the petitioner was informed that her request for compassionate appointment in the rank of HC (Min.) cannot be accepted, is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The petitioner's husband was a CRPF Constable who was found medically unfit due to 70% disability. Consequently, he was invalidated out of service on medical ground vide Ext.P1. The petitioner alleges that though the respondents have assured her pay and allowances and the basic pay for the period regularised as EOL on medical ground, the same has not been complied with.
3. The petitioner's husband expired on 28.9.06. Her request for compassionate employment was duly considered and by Exts.P6 and P7, selection test was held in the year 2008. She alleges that she passed the test as a whole, including physical, written and typewriting tests to the post of HC (Min.). Thereafter Exts.P8 and P9 have been issued stating that the appointment was under consideration and waiting for vacancy. She further alleges that in WP(C).35597/10 -:2:-
the year 2010 again a test was conducted and by Ext.P11 it was informed that she had failed in the written and typing text. It is with this background, the petitioner has approached this Court.
4. Today when the matter came up for hearing, the learned standing counsel for the respondents inviting my attention to the statement as well as Annexure-R1 produced along with it, submitted that subsequent to the filing of this writ petition, the case of the petitioner was taken up and she was given compassionate appointment. Therefore, this is no surviving cause of action in the writ petition.
In the light of the above, the writ petition is closed reserving the right of the petitioner to approach the respondents with a fresh representation, if she is having any subsisting grievance.
krj Sd/-
A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE