SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Raj) 127

PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Banita – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Tania Chugh, Himmat Jagga.
For the Respondent: Anil Kumar Bissa.

Judgement Key Points

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 (!) (!) .

What is the validity of the adoption and entitlement to compassionate appointment for the adopted daughter as a dependent of the deceased government servant?

What are the rights of the adopted daughter to compassionate appointment under Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment Rules in light of the adoption deed and judicial findings?

What is the appropriate remedy for inaction of the respondents regarding grant of compassionate appointment to the petitioner?


ORDER :

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

    “It is, therefore, humbly prayed that:

(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 peti

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      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

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
      whatsapp-icon Back to top