HARVANSH SAHAI SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to recruit the petitioner in a suitable vacancy at the place of his father late Shri Ram Dularey Lal Srivastava, U.D.A. Section Administrative B, Allahabad High Court in view of the provisions of the U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules, 1974). It has also been prayed that, that part of the Rules, 1974 be declared as null and void which violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) Brief facts for the purposes of deciding the pesent writ petition are that the petitioner's father late Sri Ram Dularey Lal Srivastava died on 8th August, 1973. At the time of his death he was employed in the High Court at Allahabad as U.D.A. in Section Administrative -B. According to the petitioner he is the only son of late Shri Ram Dularey Lal Sivastava and he was minor at the time of the death of his father. It has also been stated that the petitioner's mother Smt. Chandra Kal Devi is getting family pension of Rs. 331/- per month. The petitioner has obtained the degree of Bachelor of Arts from the Kanpur University in the year 1983. On 9th September, 1985 the petitioner made an application to the Hon'ble Chief Justice, Allahabad High Court praying to give him employment at the place of his father or in any other suitable vacancy in view of the Rules, 1974. Another application was given on 21st January, 1987 followed by another on 7th March 1987. It appears that the petitioner has also represented his case to the Union Government and the Registrar of this Court vide his letter dated 2nd May 1987 intimated that the representation of Shri Harvansh Sahai Srivastava was considered by the Court and that since the case was not covered by the provisions of Rules, 1974 he could not be given appointment and his representation had thus been rejected. A copy of the said letter has been filed along with the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent as C.A.I.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has in the present writ petition urged that Rule 5 of the Rules, 1974 in so far as it states that "in case a Government servant dies in harness after the commencement of these Rules" is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and is ultra vires as it discriminates between dependents of the Government servants who died after the commencement of the Rules and those who died before the commencement of the Rules and the aforesaid classification is not based on any intelligible differentia and rational nexus to the provisions of Rule 5 and the object sought for by the Rules 1974.