Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW BENCH
AMITABH KUMAR RAI
Archana Gautam – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J.
1. Heard Shri Arun Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Badrish Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent Nos.1, 3, Shri Pradeep Tiwari, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Shri Ran Vijay Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No.4.
2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking relief for issuance of writ of mandamus directing respondents to appoint petitioner on a suitable post according to her qualification under the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules 1974”) on compassionate grounds.
3. The facts which emerge from the record are that the father of the petitioner, namely, late Mahadeo Prasad died on 26.05.1990 while working on the post of Headmaster, Prathmik Vidyalaya, New Hyderabad, Ward Hasanganj, Lucknow. The petitioner, after attaining the age of majority, applied for appointment under Rules, 1974 on compassionate grounds through an application dated 10.10.1993 before the Secretary, Basic Shiksha, Anubhag-5, U.P. Government, Lucknow. Subsequent applications were also moved by the petitioner on 19.10.1993 and
Compassionate appointment claims must be timely; prolonged delays negate the immediate need, despite any fault of authorities.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the application for compassionate appointment should be reasonable and proximate to the time of the death of the bread earner, and the process....
Point of law: A provision for compassionate appointment is an exception to the principle that there must be an equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. The exception to be constitutio....
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 appointment is an exception and a concession, not a right, and should be made strictly in accordance with the rules. Long delays can lead to the rejection of compassionate appointments.
Compassionate appointment is not a source of recruitment and cannot be claimed or offered after a lapse of time. The financial condition of the family at the time of the employee's death is a primary....
Compassionate appointments must be evaluated with a humanitarian approach, especially for minors at the time of the employee's death, and rigid application of time limits is not appropriate.
Compassionate appointments should consider actual hardships faced by dependants rather than strict adherence to procedural timelines, promoting social justice and support for indigent families.
Point of law : Provided under Rule 5(1) of the Rules 1974 that member of the family of the deceased could only be given appointment in case a government servant dies during service and the spouse of ....
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
