NISHA LOHANI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The father of the petitioner died in harness on 26.06.2013. He was working as peon in Girls Government Higher Secondary School, Tallital, Nainital. The mother of the petitioner submitted a representation on 28.07.2014 before the competent authority to consider the name of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground but no decision had been taken by the respondents. Petitioner approached this Court by way of filing of WPSS No.2331 of 2015 which was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to take a decision on the representation as expeditiously as possible. The representation was rejected vide order dated 15.01.2016 primarily on the ground that 'married daughter' does not fall within the ambit of "Family" as per the Rule 2(c) of the U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as "The Dying in Harness Rules,1974") adopted by State of Uttarakhand.

(2.) Ms. Mamta Joshi, Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has vehemently argued that the Rule 2(c) of the Dying and Harness Rules is arbitrary and unreasonable, since, it excludes the married daughter for getting compassionate appointment after the death of her father. The Dying and Harness Rules is also violative of Articles 14, 15 & 16 of the Constitution of India, since the married son is not excluded but only married daughter is excluded from getting the job on the compassionate ground.

(3.) Learned State counsel appearing for respondents has supported the Dying and Harness Rules.