JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner, Manjul Srivastava has impugned an order of June the 25th, 2020, passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Prayagraj, rejecting her claim for compassionate appointment under The Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 (for short, ‘the Rules).

2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3, which is taken on record.

3. Mr. Sharad Chandra Upadhyay, learned State Law Officer, was granted time to file a short counter affidavit. He has not come up with any return.

4. Admit.

5. Heard forthwith.

6. Heard Mr. Ghan Shyam Maurya, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Arun Kumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3 and Mr. Sharad Chandra Upadhyay, learned State Law Officer appearing on behalf of respondent no.1.

7. The question, that arises for consideration here, is: “Whether the judgment of this Court in Smt. Vimla Srivastava vs. State of U.P. and another, 2016 (1) ADJ 21 striking down the word ‘unmarried’ in Rule 2(c) (iii) of the Rules, entitles a married daughter to a consideration of her claim for compassionate appointment without an amendment to the Ru