Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN - PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JODHP
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J
Vishnu Datt – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12188 / 2017
For the Appellants/Petitioners: NR Budania
For the Respondents: DR Kawadia
Customary adoption, when evidenced by official records (such as academic certificates and ration cards) issued during the employee's lifetime, is valid for claiming compassionate appointment, and subsequent registration of the adoption deed acts as a ratification of the earlier customary adoption.
Headnote:The petitioner challenged the rejection of a compassionate appointment under the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of deceased Government Servant Rules, 1996, and a circular dated 26.08.2006. The respondents rejected the claim on the grounds that the registered adoption deed was executed after the death of the government servant; however, the petitioner produced academic mark-sheets, a ration card, and residence certificates dated prior to the death of the employee, indicating a pre-existing customary adoption. The court addressed whether customary adoption, evidenced by official documents, is sufficient to establish the status of a dependent even if the formal registration of the adoption deed occurs after the death of the employee. The court reasoned that the academic records and the ration card "authentically points out" that the adoption happened prior to the death, and subsequent registration is merely a "ratification of an earlier customary decision." Hence, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 20.06.2017 is quashed and set aside and the respondents are directed to give compassionate appointment to the petitioner as per his own eligibility and suitability, within a period of three months from today.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim for compassionate appointment based on adoption status. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. evidentiary value of pre-death documents in proving customary adoption. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. customary adoption precedes and justifies subsequent formal registration for legal benefits. (Para 9 , 10) |
Order
1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:
“(I) By appropriate writ order or direction, the impugned letter / order dated 20.06.2017 issued by the respondents may kindly be declared illegal and be quashed and set aside.
(2) By appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment and consequently respondents may be directed to give the appointment to the petitioner on the respective post.
(3) Any other order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court deemed just and proper be passed in favour of the petitioner.”
2. Brief facts of this case, as noticed by this Court, are that the petitioner was adopted by Shri Durga Prasad, who was the Beldar in the Irrigation Department at the Office of Assistant Engineer, Water resources Sub-Division, Burji No.195 Anoopgarh District Sri Ganganagar. The petitioner’s father late Shri Durga Prasad took the adoption of the petitioner, which is reflected in the ration card issued to the family on 20.11.2005, which is Annexure-1 of the writ petition. The name of late Shri Durga Prasad is also mentioned in the category of father’s name in the mark-sheet of classes 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th and 12th which are Annexure-2 to Annexure-7 of the writ petition.
3. The transfer certificate, and the bonafide residence certificate issued by the Tehsildar and Aadhar Card issued by the competent authority are on record as Annexure 8, 9 and 10 respectively, and all such documents carry the petitioner’s father name as Durga Prasad. However, the customary adoption was converted into a registered adoption deed on 20.04.2015 by the mother of the petitioner vide Annexure-11. The father of the petitioner that is Shri Late Shri Durga Prasad expired, while in service, on 17.03.2015 prior to the adoption deed being registered.
4. The application for compassionate appointment was made but the same has been rejected by the respondents by passing a cryptic order, in which it was stated that as per the Rule 2 (x) of Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of deceased Government Servant Rules, 1996 , it was imperative upon the deceased employee to have done the adoption during his lifetime. The order also mentions a circular dated 26.08.2006, wherein the person concerned would not be entitled for compassionate appointment, if the information of succession is not rendered by the employee concerned during his life time.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner Shri NR Budania has pointed out that the death of the petitioners’ father had happened in the year 2015 whereas the documents from Annexure-3 to Annexure-10 are relatable to the period prior to the death of Shri Durga Prasad, except the documents of Transfer Certificate, Residence Certificate and Aadhar Card, which is Annexures 8, 9 and 10 of the writ petition.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has however pointed out that the Board Certificate of 10th class, which is supposed to be a very authentic document for any students undergoing the Board Examination, has been issued on 06.06.2014 by the statutory authority of Board of Secondary Education, Ajmer Rajasthan, which is prior to the death of the petitioner’s father.
7. Learned counsel for the respondent is not in a position to refute the aforementioned factual averments. The argument raised by learned counsel for the respondent Shri DR Kawadia is that the petitioner got the registered adoption deed on 20.04.2015, whereas the death of the father of the petitioner had happened on 17.03.2015.
8. Learned counsel for th
