Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, J.
Banita – Petitioner
Versus
State and Another – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13932 of 2015
Decided On : 01-02-2024
Compassionate Appointment - Adoption Validity - 17.09.2011 - The court discussed the validity of the adoption deed executed on 12.05.2005 and the adoption done on 12.01.2004. The judgment declared the adoption as valid, upholding the petitioner's entitlement for compassionate appointment.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an adopted daughter, sought compassionate appointment after her adoptive father's death. The court upheld the validity of the adoption and directed the respondents to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's adoption was valid and she was entitled to compassionate appointment as a dependent of the deceased government servant.
Issues: Validity of the adoption, entitlement for compassionate appointment, and inaction of the respondents in granting the appointment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the validity of the adoption and ruled that the petitioner, as a dependent, was entitled to compassionate appointment. The inaction of the respondents in granting the appointment was deemed unsustainable.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the respondents were directed to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner within three months.
Key Points: - The court held the adoption of the petitioner by the deceased government servant valid and upheld the adoption deed executed on 12.05.2005 and dated 12.01.2004 adoption as valid (!) (!) (!) . - The petitioner was entitled to compassionate appointment as a dependent of the deceased government servant (!) (!) . - Respondents were directed to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner within three months, with benefits to operate prospectively (!) . - The adoption and status as a dependent fall under Rule 2(c) of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996 (!) . - Inaction of the respondents in granting the appointment was deemed unsustainable, and prior similarly situated cases (Kuldeep Singh, Manoj Kumar) were referenced to support entitlement (!) (!) (!) . - The judgment discusses earlier judgments and their applicability to determine eligibility despite age at adoption and registration of the deed (!) (!) .
ORDER :
1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:
(a) The writ petition may kindly be allowed.
(b) An appropriate writ, direction and order may be issued against the respondents to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner on the post of Lower division clerk on account of death of her adoptive father Hansraj S/o Parsaram who was posted as constable 419 in District Sri Ganganagar since 7.9.1975 and died due to disease on 13.9.2009 while in service within a period of two months.
(c) Cost of litigation may be awarded to the petitioner.
(d) Any other relief which this Hon’ble High Court may deem fit and proper may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.”
2. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the petitioner, are that the petitioner is the adopted daughter of one Hansraj S/o Parsaram, who was appointed as Constable, Police Department, in the District Sri Ganganagar on 07.09.1975, whereafter, while being in service, he expired due to certain ailment on 13.09.2009. Late Hansraj was survived by his wife-Vidya Devi and the present petitioner (adopted daughter). The petitioner is possessing the qualification of senior secondary, and after the death of Hansraj, his wife Vidya Devi, i.e. the adoptive mother of the petitioner filed application seeking compassionate appointment of the present petitioner. Alongwith such application, an affidavit has also been submitted to the effect that the petitioner is the adopted daughter of Late Hansraj and his wife Vidya Devi and that the adoption deed was executed on 12.05.2005.
2.1. The learned Civil Judge, Sriganganagar, vide its judgment dated 17.09.2011 passed in Case No. 117/2010, declared that the petitioner is the adopted daughter of the deceased government servant and that such adoption was done on 12.01.2004 as per the rituals, and the adoption deed was executed on 12.05.2005, which was declared as valid. Thereafter, the Office of Administrative Officer issued a letter dated 09.07.2014 seeking certain clarification regarding the aforementioned judgment dated 17.09.2011, and thereafter, the Assistant Superintendent of Police issued a letter dated 30.12.2014 to the District Superintendent of Police, Sriganganagar, clarifying therein that there is no ambiguity in the aforementioned judgment, while clarifying certain other relevant things also.
2.2. Thereafter, the petitioner issued a legal notice dated 19.10.2015 to the concerned respondent authority in the matter of grant of compassionate appointment to her, and aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in not granting her the appointment in question, the present petition has been preferred claiming the afore-quoted reliefs.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the aforementioned judgment dated 17.09.2011, whereby the learned Court has declared the petitioner’s adoption as valid, while upholding the validity of the adoption deed executed on 12.05.2005, the petitioner is the daughter of the deceased government servant for all purposes, including her entitlement for grant of the compassionate appointment in question.
3.1. Learned counsel further submits that at the time of adoption in question i.e. on 12.04.2004, the petitioner was 14 years old and the adoption deed was executed on 12.05.2005. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner’s father expired while in service, and therefore, the petitioner is entitled in all respects for the compassionate appointment in question, as per the law. Learned counsel further submits that the concerned Sarpanch has also issued legal heir certificate on 05.03.2014 in favour of the petitioner.
3.2. In support of his submissions, learned counsel referred to the following orders passed by this Hon’ble Court:
(b) Manoj
The central legal point established is the validity of the adoption and the entitlement of the adopted daughter to compassionate appointment as a dependent of the deceased government servant.
Legal adoption for compassionate appointment must occur during the lifetime of the deceased government servant to qualify as a dependent under the Rajasthan Compassionate appointment of Dependents of....
Rule 2 provides that term ‘son’ includes a son legally adopted by deceased Government servant during his/her life time.
The court established that the timing of adoption registration does not negate eligibility for compassionate appointment if the adoption occurred before the government employee's death.
In case suitable post is not vacant applicant shall have option either to wait for post applied for or to accepts lower available post.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for compliance with the legal provisions of the Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance Act, 1956 for a valid adoption claim, and the importance of ....
Compassionate appointment requires valid legal adoption under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, and failure to establish such validity disqualifies applicants from entitlement under the relevan....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
