MANOJ BISHT Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri B.D. Upadhyaya, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri K.C. Tiwari, the learned Brief Holder for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioners father was appointed as a daily wager in the year 1983 in the Forest Department and having worked for more than 15 years died in harness on 14.06.1998. The petitioner, being the son of the deceased, immediately applied for an appointment on compassionate grounds under the Dying -in -Harness Rules. This application remained pending and, eventually, when no action were taken by the respondents, the petitioner filed the present writ petition praying for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioner under the Dying -in -Harness Rules.

(3.) THE respondents have filed a counter affidavit admitting that the petitioners father was appointed as a daily wager in the Forest Department in the year 1983 and also admitted the fact that he died in harness in the year 1998. The respondents, however, has taken a stand that the petitioners father was not a government employee as defined under Rule 2 (a) of the U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying In Harness Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules of 1974). Consequently, the petitioner was not entitled for being appointed on compassionate grounds.