2014 Supreme(All) 3767
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Devendra Kumar Arora, J.
Sapana Tiwari - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P.Thru. Prin.Secy.Medical Health & Family & 4 Ors - Respondent
Service Single No. 6829 of 2014
Decided On : 27-11-2014
For the Petitioner:- Sangeeta Jasiwal
For the Respondent:- Sri Badrul Hasan C.S.C.
Ineligibility of a married daughter for compassionate appointment under the U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants (Dying In Harness) Rules, 1974.
Headnote:
Mandamus - Appointment Dispute - U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants (Dying In Harness) Rules, 1974 - Rule 2(c), Ninth Amendment Rules, 2011 - Case law interpretations
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought mandamus for appointment under the Dying In Harness Rules, challenging the appointment of her step brother made on compassionate grounds. The petitioner claimed to be the only dependent member of her family and fully eligible for compassionate appointment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner, being a married daughter, did not fall within the category of family member of the deceased Government servant as per the Rules, 1974. The court emphasized the importance of proper pleadings and full particulars in petitions and dismissed the petition as wholly misconceived.
Issues: Dispute over compassionate appointment eligibility under the Rules, 1974 for a married daughter and the challenge to the appointment of the petitioner's step brother.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the strict consideration of compassionate employment requests in accordance with the governing scheme and highlighted the ineligibility of a married daughter for compassionate appointment under the Rules, 1974.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed as wholly misconceived due to the petitioner's ineligibility for compassionate appointment under the Rules, 1974.
Dr. Devendra Kumar Arora, J.
Heard learned counsel for petitioner Ms. Sangeeta Jaiswal and Sri Badrul Hasan, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.
2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to consider and appoint the petitioner on the suitable post under the dying-in-harness Rules. The petitioner is also challenging the appointment of her step brother, made on compassionate ground, by the opposite parties.
3. Submission of learned counsel for petitioner is that the mother of the petitioner (late (Smt.) Chandrakanti w/o Sri Dev Narain Tewari, was posted as A.N.M. at Prathmik Swasthya Kendra Dubeypur, District Sultanpur), was the second wife of Shri Dev Narain Tewari. The petitioner is the only daughter of her mother (late Chandrakanti) and the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Sultanpur issued relation certificate dated 06.09.2013wherein it has specifically been mentioned that there is no other relative of deceased Smt. Chandra Kanti except the petitioner and her father Sri Dev Narain Tewari. It is also submitted that after the death of the mother of petitioner, she submitted an application dated 11.12.2013 before opposite party no.4 i.e. Chief Medical Officer Sultanpur for her appointment under the provisions of the U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants (Dying In Harness) Rules, 1974, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules, 1974') since she was the dependent member of her family, having qualification of M.A. , thus, fully eligible for compassionate appointment under the provisions of Rules, 1974. It is further submitted that the petitioner while waiting for her appointment letter from the office of opposite party no.4, but on receiving, a notice of caveat petition filed by Sri Virendra Kumar, the step brother of petitioner and to know that appointment under the Rules, 1974 was given to opposite party no.4 on account of death of mother of petitioner vide order dated 25.02.2014, without considering and deciding the application of the petitioner, which is still pending for decision, she shocked.
4. Further submission of learned counsel for petitioner is that the petitioner is married but she has been left by her husband and she was living with her motheer at the time of death of her mother. It is also submitted that there was dispute between the mother and father of petitioner and the mother of petitioner was living with the petitioner separately and petitioner was dependent upon her mother because she has no source of income. The petitioner also submitted her representation on 25.03.2014 before the opposite parties and pointed out true facts that the appointment of the step brother of petitioner made on the basis of false and fabricated documents. But when no action has been taken at the end of the opposite parties, the petitioner is constrained to approach this court by filing the instant writ petition.
5. Sri Badrul Hasan, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, while opposing the writ petition has submitted that a married daughter does not fall within the category of family member of deceased Government servant as per definition clause given under the aforesaid Rules, 1974. Rule 2(c) of the Rules, 1974. In exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, the Government has been pleased to make the following rules with a view to amending the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 vide notification dated 22.12.2011, known as "The Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents Government Servants Dying in Harness (Ninth Amendment) Rules, 2011. The definition of 'family' as per the amended definition clause 2(c) reads as under: -
"2(c)'family' shall include the following relations of the deceased Government servant:
(i) wife or husband;
(ii) sons/adopted sons;
(iii) unmarried daughters, unmarried adopted daughters, widowed daughters and widowed da