RAVINDRA VERMA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE ALMORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner primarily for quashing the order dated 22.5.2006 (Annexure - 9 to the writ petition) and also for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to appoint the petitioner on Class III post under the U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 (from hereinafter referred to as "the Dying in Harness Rules").

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that earlier he had filed a writ petition before this Court being Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1297 of 2005 Ravindra Verma v. D.M. Almora praying for a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment under the Dying in Harness Rules on a Class III post. The petitioner builds his claim for such appointment on the basis of his assertion that he is the "adopted son" of late Shri Shiv Prasad, who was working on Class IV post as a "Weaver" with District Magistrate, Almora, who died in harness on 22.3.2002. The petitioner claiming to be the "adopted son" of the deceased, had filed a Succession Case No. 15 of 2002 before the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Almora, for obtaining a succession certificate, which was decided in his favour on 18.11.2003. On the basis of that succession certificate, the entire amount as Gratuity, GIS, GPF and Leave Encashment was released in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, on 15.4.2002, the petitioner submitted an application under the Dying in Harness Rules for appointment on a Class III post and continued filing representations. As nothing materialised in favour of the petitioner, petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 1297 of 2005, which has already been referred above. While disposing of the aforesaid writ petition with the direction to the respondent i.e. District Magistrate, Almora to decide the representation of the petitioner for appointment under the Dying in Harness Rules, this Court observed as follows:

(3.) On the above observations and directions, the District Magistrate, Almora was directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner. Consequently, the District Magistrate, Almora gave a hearing to the petitioner and after considering the directions of this Court under the aforesaid rules, as referred above, and taking into consideration other evidence adduced before him including the report of DGC, he came to the conclusion that the deceased Shiv Prasad during his service had married, though after sometime his wife left Shiv Prasad. Therefore, regarding the succession certificate, the District Magistrate, Almora came to the conclusion that the succession certificate has been obtained without disclosing this relevant fact. In fact, he has procured the post retirement benefits of the deceased without disclosing the relevant facts. He also came to the conclusion that considering the economic condition of the petitioner, it is not a fit case for appointment under the Dying in Harness Rules.