DHIRENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has emerged from a conflict of claims to compassionate appointment between the two sons of the late Mishri Lal, a Government servant, who died in harness. Late Mishri Lal was a chowkidar in the Establishment of the Construction Unit, Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam, Power House Road, 102/1017, Kasturi Niwas, Mohammadipur, Gorakhpur. The deceased was a permanent employee. Mishri Lal died in harness on 03.05.2014, leaving behind him, his widow Smt. Vidya Devi and four sons, all adults, to wit, Ashok Kumar, Dhirendra Kumar, Brijesh Kumar and Vijay Kumar. The two sons of the late Mishri Lal, who have staked rival claims to compassionate appointment under The Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974 (for short the Rules of 1974 ) are the petitioner, Dhirendra Kumar, on the one hand, and the fifth respondent, Brijesh Kumar, on the other.

(2.) It is the petitioner's case that he is the eldest son of the deceased. He applied under the Rules of 1974 on 27.05.2014. It is the petitioner's case that his mother, Smt. Vidya Devi, tendered an affidavit dated 27.05.2014, indicating her willingness for a compassionate appointment in favour of the petitioner, in place of her deceased husband. A copy of the affidavit dated 27.05.2014, allegedly sworn by Smt. Vidya Devi in the petitioner's favour, is on record. The petitioner has also averred that while his father was alive, he had executed an unregistered will in the petitioner's favour, a copy whereof he has annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. The will carries a nomination in favour of the petitioner by the testator, virtually bequeathing to the petitioner a right to compassionate appointment after his decease.

(3.) The Court has been taken through the contents of the will by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is the petitioner's further case that he is a graduate. This Court must remark that in support of this assertion of his, the petitioner has annexed two certificates, which show that he has earned his matriculation and intermediate examination certificates from The U.P. Board of High School and Intermediate Education. There is no copy of a bachelor's degree of any kind to show that the petitioner is a graduate. The petitioner claims that no action was taken, on his request for compassionate appointment, for a considerable period of time. He, therefore, approached higher functionaries of the Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam on 01.07.2014, complaining of inaction on the part the Jal Nigam authorities. It is asserted that all this inaction compelled the petitioner to institute Writ - A No. 45913 of 2014 before this Court, praying that his claim for compassionate appointment may be dealt with and decided. Writ - A No. 45913 of 2014 was disposed of by this Court, by an order dated 02.09.2014, requiring respondent no. 2 to the petition to decide the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment, carried in his representation dated 27.05.2014, within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of that order before the said respondent. It is the petitioner's case that by the impugned order dated 22.12.2014, his representation has been rejected, and instead, the fifth respondent's claim to compassionate appointment, on account of their father's death in harness, has been accepted. This order has been passed by the Superintending Engineer, Construction Unit, U.P. Jal Nigam, Lucknow.