Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
MANJIVE SHUKLA, J.
Uday Pratap Singh - Petitioner
Versus
District Basic Education Officer, Basti and Others - Respondents
Writ - A No. 2134 of 2023
Decided On : 08-08-2023
Compassionate Appointment - Violation of Government Order - 4.9.2000 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Government Order dated 4.9.2000 - U.P. Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 - Summary: The petitioner's appointment was made on compassionate grounds after the death of his mother. The appointment was challenged after 19 years on the grounds of violation of the Government Order dated 4.9.2000. The District Basic Education Officer initiated disciplinary proceedings and terminated the petitioner's services. The petitioner's father had disclosed his employment status at the time of the appointment. The court found that there was no suppression of facts by the petitioner at the time of his initial appointment. The court also noted that the appointment was cancelled based on a complaint by a private person, despite previous dismissal of a Public Interest Litigation on the same grounds. The court held that the cancellation of the appointment after 19 years, without following proper disciplinary inquiry procedures, was unsustainable. The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the termination order, and directed the reinstatement of the petitioner with full back wages and benefits.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner's appointment on compassionate grounds was challenged after 19 years, alleging a violation of the Government Order dated 4.9.2000. The District Basic Education Officer initiated disciplinary proceedings and terminated the petitioner's services.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no suppression of facts by the petitioner at the time of his initial appointment. The court also noted that the appointment was cancelled based on a complaint by a private person, despite previous dismissal of a Public Interest Litigation on the same grounds. The court held that the cancellation of the appointment after 19 years, without following proper disciplinary inquiry procedures, was unsustainable.
Issues: Violation of Government Order dated 4.9.2000, Suppression of facts, Proper disciplinary inquiry procedures
Ratio Decidendi: The appointment cannot be cancelled after 19 years based on a complaint, without following proper disciplinary inquiry procedures. There was no suppression of facts by the petitioner at the time of his initial appointment.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the termination order, and directed the reinstatement of the petitioner with full back wages and benefits.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Adarsh Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Ashok Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Sri Awadhesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents No.1 & 2 as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.3.
2. Petitioner through present writ petition has assailed the order dated 30.12.2022 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Basti, whereby services of the petitioner have been terminated.
3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that mother of the petitioner Smt. Tilakraji Devi, while working on the post of Head Mistress in Junior Basic School Jagdishpur, Block Harraiya, District Basti, died in harness on 18.10.2000. Petitioner, after death of his mother, submitted an application for his compassionate appointment and along with the application, he also submitted affidavits given by his father and brother. In the affidavit given by the petitioner's father, it was categorically mentioned that he was working as Head Master in Primary School Khamariya Sujat, Block Harraiya, District Basti.
4. The Selection Committee headed by the District Basic Education Officer, Basti considered the application for compassionate appointment filed by the petitioner and after scrutinizing the documents filed along with the application, the District Basic Education Officer, Basti issued an order on 21.7.2003, whereby petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher (untrained grade) in Primary School Hahi, Block Harraiya, District Basti.
5. Petitioner pursuant to his appointment order dated 21.7.2003 submitted joining in the primary school on 22.7.2003 and started discharging duties attached to his post. Petitioner also started getting salary from the State exchequer with effect from 22.7.2003. Later on, petitioner completed his in-service B.T.C. Training Course in the year 2005 and thereafter, the District Basic Education Officer, Basti passed an order on 27.9.2005, whereby petitioner was granted pay-scale of the post of the trained Assistant Teacher.
6. Petitioner since the date of his initial appointment i.e. since 22.7.2003 continued to perform duties of his post and since his work and conduct was excellent, as such, the District Basic Education Officer, Basti vide order dated 30.12.2010 promoted the petitioner to the post of Head Master of Junior Basic School, Revradas II, Block Harraiya, District Basti.
7. On 28.2.2013 one Mr. Sudesh Bhaskar, resident of village Khamariya Sujat, Block Harraiya, District Basti lodged a complaint to the District Magistrate, Basti thereby allegation was levelled that compassionate appointment of the petitioner is against the provisions made in the Government Order dated 4.9.2000, wherein it is provided that if the surviving spouse of the deceased teacher is in government service, then his dependent will not be entitled for compassionate appointment, whereas at the time of compassionate appointment of the petitioner, his father was working on the post of Head Master in a primary school at District Basti. Mr. Sudesh Bhaskar through the aforesaid complaint requested the District Magistrate, Basti to cancel the compassionate appointment of the petitioner. The District Magistrate, Basti on the aforesaid complaint of Mr. Sudesh Bhaskar, directed the District Basic Education Officer, Basti to submit a report. The District Basic Education Officer, Basti vide his letter dated 18.5.2013 submitted a report to the District Magistrate, Basti, wherein it was categorically mentioned that at the time of compassionate appointment of the petitioner, disclosure was made by his father that he was working on the post of the Head Master in Primary School Khamariya Sujat, Block Harraiya, District Basti and only after considering all the facts and circumstances, the petitioner was offered compassionate appointment and further petitioner has also been promoted to the post of the Head Master and therefore, after lapse of m
Cancellation of appointment after 19 years, without following proper disciplinary inquiry procedures, and based on a complaint, was unsustainable.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of a claim for compassionate appointment after 11 years, when the petitioner had already applied for compassionate appointment i....
Compassionate appointment is an exception to the general rule and is provided to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis caused by the death of the bread earner. The appointment can only be ....
The court emphasized that in matters of compassionate appointment, one cannot insist on appointment to a particular post, and the provisions of the Government order dated 04.09.2000 regarding the rem....
Point of Law : As more than 30 years have passed since the father of the petitioner/appellant had expired, neither there is any useful purpose to issue any positive direction, nor the facts of the ca....
Compassionate appointments cannot be cancelled based on non-disclosure of a parent's employment if the applicant was dependent on the deceased and no fraud was committed.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that compassionate appointment cannot be claimed as a matter of right, but if an applicant is bona fide and fulfills the necessary qualifications, ....
Compassionate appointment should be provided immediately to redeem the family in distress, and the financial condition of the family at the time of the death of the deceased employee is the primary c....
Once a compassionate appointment is accepted, the right to further appointment under the same scheme is extinguished, and lacking requisite qualifications invalidates the appointment.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
