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

2015 Supreme(All) 1095

B.AMIT STHALEKAR
MUDITA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Prabhakar Dubey for the Petitioner; C.S.C. and Ashok Kumar Singh for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble B. Amit Sthalekar, J.—Heard Shri Prabhakar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Santosh Kumar Singh, appearing for the respondent No. 2 and Shri K.K. Rai, learned standing counsel for the respondent No. 1.

2. The petitioner is seeking quashing of the order dated 27.7.2015 whereby her claim for appointment on compassionate ground has been rejected on the ground that she is a married daughter and therefore under the U.P. Recruitment of Dependent of Government Servant Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974 (the Rules, 1974) is not entitled for appointment on compassionate ground. The fact that the petitioner is a married daughter is not in dispute. Her mother is stated to be the Government servant who died while still in service. Under Rule 2(c) of the Rules, 1974 the family has been defined as under:

“2(c) “family” shall include the following relations of the deceased Government servant:

(i) wife of husband;

(ii) sons/adopted sons;

(iii) unmarried daughters, unmarried adopted daughters, widowed daughters and widowed daughter-in-law;

(iv) unmarried brothers, unmarried sisters and widowed mother dependent on the deceased Government servant, if the deceased Governmen







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