AMIT KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the respondent.

(2.) Petitioner's father was a peon in Judgeship Bijnor. He died in harness. Petitioner has been appointed on the post of peon in the same Judgeship under U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servant Dying-in-harness Rule 1974. Petitioner has also joined on the post of peon ,however, he wants a Class III job. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a report given by two Additional district Judges on 8.1.2010 to the District Judge which is Annexure 5 to the writ petition recommending that petitioner may be appointed as clerk on compassionate ground as his father died in harness on 22.5.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon an authority of this Court Rajesh Singh Vs. Director of Education,1991 UPLBEC 345.

(3.) I do not agree with the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner. The Supreme Court in Commissioner of Public Instructions Vs. K.R. Vishwanath, 2005 AIR(SC) 3275 has held that strictly the claim of compassionate appointment can not be upheld on the touchstone of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India and that the object of such appointment is to enable the family to get over sudden financial crisis or to mitigate the hardship due to death of the bread earner in the family. Paragraphs 10,11 and 11 A of the said authority are quoted below: