Honble VERMA, J.–The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Phooli Devi Wife of Nanga Ram Meena and Roshan Lal Meena son of Shri nanga Ram Meena with the prayer that the petitioners are entitled to all pensionary benefits including GPF, Insurance etc. payable to Nanag Ram Meena with the further prayer that the petitioner No. 2 is also entitled to appointment on compassionate ground because of the death of Nanag Ram Meena while in service.

(2). The facts are that one Nanag Ram Meena was working as Chowkidar on temporary basis since 1.5.1970 and was made permanent in the year 1972. He continued to work with the respondent till 2.4.1986 but vanished w.e.f. 3.4.1986. He had put in about 15 years of service. A public notice was issued in the news paper `Daily Navjyoti no 11.10.1987 asking the said Nanag Ram meena to present himself in the office and again further notice were issued on 22.3.1988 for the same direction. According to the petitioner said nanag Ram Meena is un-traceable since April 1986 and he has not been heard or traced ever since. After about 10 years of such dis-appearance of this husband of the petitioner No. 1, she applied to the department that said Nanag Ram Meena is presumed to be dead and that she be given the appointment in place of her husband on compassionate ground under the Recruitment to the Government Servants (Dying While in Service) Rules. Even a demand notice was issued for granting the family pension, arrears of salary of the husband etc. etc. Her son has also become major on 24.7.2000. Ultimately, finding no response the present petition has been filed for the reliefs mentioned therein.

(3). In the reply filed by the respondent, it is not denied that nanag Ram Meena was employed with the respondent but according to the respondent he had dis-appeared from 2.4.1986 and despite notices having been published for his attending the office in the year 1986 and 1987, he has not been heard of nor her has joined the service. It is the case of the respondent that the petitioners have not initiated any proceedings before any competent court for the presumptive finding that Nanag Ram Meena is presumed to be dead. It is further submitted by the respondent that because of the absence of Nanag Ram Meena right from 1986 and also of the fact that he had never reported for duty; he was charge-sheeted on 28.5.1993 along with statement of allegations which was returned back as unserved and ultimately the service of said Nanag Ram Meena are said to be terminated on 23.4.2001 vide Annexures R/3 and R/4. Even though it is not denied that Nanag Ram Meena had not been heard of right from 1986, but it is submitted that the petitioners are not entitled to any service benefits of Nanag Ram Meena.

(4). Counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment of this court in the case of Smt. Chaya Nandini vs. State & Ors. (1), wherein presumption is to be drawn u/Sec. 108 of the Evidence Act about the death of a person if he is not heard of by the persons who would have naturally heard of him if he had been alive; it was held that the widow was entitled to all benefits treating her husband to be dead. Almost in similar circumstances as the present case and in the case of Smt. Chaya Nandini (supra), it was observed as under:-

``Having heard the learned counsel, I am of the opinion that since there is a uncontroverted affidavit of the petitioner that she has not heard of her husband for the last seven years, a presumption would arise under Sec. 108 of Evidence Act that he is dead. The respondents, therefore, have to grant relief to the petitioner on the basis that her husband is dead and she is a widow of deceased Govt. servant.

This petition is, therefore, allowed and it is directed that the respondents shall grant all the benefits to the petitioner to which she is entitled on the basis that she is widow of a deceased Govt. servant. The petitioner or any member of family of the deceased Govt. servant shall be entitled to em

Click Here to Read the rest of this document