PREMA MEEZA Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Ashish Joshi, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Shri Sudhir Singh, the learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

(2.) The Respondents have filed a counter-affidavit admitting that the Petitioner's husband was appointed as a daily wager in the Forest Department in the year 1983 and also admitting the fact that he died in harness in the year 2000. The Respondents, however, has taken a stand that the Petitioner's husband 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.

(3.) Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, the Court finds that the Petitioner is entitled for the appropriate relief. For facility, Rule 2(a) of the Rules of 1974 is quoted hereunder: