USHA SAXENA Vs. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties on the merit of the matter.

(2.) FATHER of the Appellant/Petitioner died on 1.6.2005. Soon thereafter, Appellant applied for appointment on compassionate ground. This was not considered nor any decision thereon was rendered. Appellant, accordingly, filed a writ petition registered as writ petition No. 1489/05 (S/S). While the writ petition was pending, in 2008 Appellant got married. The said writ petition was decided on 13.4.2010, when a learned Judge of this Court expressed an opinion that the Appellant/Petitioner is entitled to be considered for appointment on compassionate grounds under the U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974. Writ petition was allowed and a writ of mandamus was issued to the Respondents to consider the application of the Appellant/Petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground in light of the observations made in the said order and to pass a reasoned and speaking order within three months from the date of the production of certified copy of the order.

(3.) THE question whether the right to obtain appointment on compassionate ground, crystallized as on the date of making of application or as on the date of filing of the previous writ petition, has not been dealt with in the judgment and order under appeal. Because an application for compassionate appointment has yet not been considered, a citizen, otherwise entitled to get married, will not marry is understandable but if she marries, whether her right, otherwise crystallized, stands washed away, has not been decided in the judgment and order under appeal. We think substantial questions of law have been raised and, accordingly, the writ petition should not have been dismissed at the threshold, without even calling for affidavits. We, accordingly, allow the appeal, set aside the judgment and order under appeal and remit the matter back for reconsideration on merits.