Honble CHAUHAN, J. – In view of the conflicting decisions rendered by the learned Single Judges regarding the ambit and scope of R. 5 of the Rajasthan (Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servant Dying While in Service) Rules, 1975 (referred to hereinafter as ``the Rules), the learned Single Judge, vide order dated 25.7.1997, has referred the matter to the Larger Bench for resolving the con- troversy under proviso (c) to R. 55 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules, 1952. The issue referred to reads as under :–

``Whether in a situation where both the spouses, i.e., husband and wife are in Government service and in the event of death of one, the other still remaining in Government service, whether the dependants as defined in the definition of "family" u/R. 2(f) of the Rajasthan (Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying While in Service) Rules, 1975 is entitled to seek employment on the ground that because of the death of his father or mother, as the case may be, he be treated as a dependant of the deceased Government employ- ment irrespective of the fact that his father or mother was an Government employee in service at the time of death of the other spouse and whether the Rajasthan (Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying While in Service) Rules, 1975 have been framed to give employment in such situation as well when one of the spouse remains and continues as Government servant at the time of the death of the other spouse and whether the family member of such deceased spouse is entitled to invoke the benefit of these Rules."

(2). The petition reveals that the petitioner was having the requisite qualification for appointment to the post of Lower Division Clerk under the State Govern- ment and he applied for the benefit of the said Rules by giving him employment on compassionate ground because of the death of his mother late (Smt.) Damyanti Togar, who was working as the Assistant Teacher in the Education Department. The Department, vide order dated 13.10.1994 contained in Annexure R. 1, rejected the claim of the petitioner by stating that the petitioner was not entitled for the bene- fit under the Rules as he had been dependant on his father who is still in government service. The applicant is aggrieved of the said order and his submission has been that inspite of the fact that his father is still in the Government service, he is entitled for the benefit of the said Rules. For the same, reliance had been placedon the judgment in: Gulshan Chopra vs. State of Raj. & Ors. (1), delivered by Honble Miss Kanta Bhatnagar, J. (as she then was), wherein it has been observed as under :–

"5. The object of the framing the Rules was to give relief to the family of the deceased Government servants. For the purposes of the Rules, deceased Government servant means a Government servant who dies while in service. The definition of "family" reads as under:–

"Family" means the family of the deceased Government Servant and shall include wife or husband, sons and unmarried or widow daughters and son/daughter adopted according to the provisions of law, by the deceased Government servant, who were dependant on the deceased Government servant."

6. There is force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the definition of the "family" nowhere mentions complete dependancy of the family member seeking an employment on the deceased Government Servant.

7. Rule 5 of the Rules deals with the recruitment of the Member of the family of the deceased is also relevant for the purpose. It provides that in case of "deceased government servants" one member of his family, who is not already employed under the Central/State Government or Statutory Board/Organisations/Corporations owned or controlled by the Central/State Government, shall, on making an appli- cation for the purpose, be given a suitable employment in Government service without delay only against the existing vacancy, which is not within the purview of the Stat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document