AMAR PARASHER Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petitioner's appeal arising out of the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge, dated December 5, 2018, dismissing Writ - A No. 751 of 2017.

(2.) The late Brijesh Parasher, the writ petitioner Amar Parasher's father, was employed with the Uttar Pradesh Radio Police as a Head Operator and posted at the Police Radio Head Quarters, Firozabad. He died in harness on December 13, 2004. Not only did the writ petitioner's father die in harness, but it appears from a communication dated October 19, 2005, addressed to the Station House Officers of Police Station Etmadpur/ New Agra/ Bah by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Agra, that he died on duty. As a token of acknowledgment to the fact that the writ petitioner's father died on duty, his widow and dependent, Smt. Meera Parasher were called on the Police Commemoration Day to accept for her husband a Martyrs' Honour. There is on record an application made by the writ petitioner's mother, Smt. Meera Parasher and the deceased's widow, indicating the personal profile of the family members that the late Brijesh Parasher left behind. The application shows that the family comprised of minor children numbering two, including the writ petitioner, then aged 12 years and an aged mother of the deceased, who was of 74 years. The widow was 35 years and in the application, she indicated the need that the family had for a compassionate appointment to tide over the sudden financial crisis into which the family had plunged. Yet, she did not claim for herself on the ground that the children were young and pursuing their studies, which required the widow's complete attention and management. She requested that while she considered herself disabled from seeking compassionate appointment on the above account, she was willing to seek appointment for her son/ daughter upon either turning a major. It was also indicated that the son or the daughter of the deceased would seek compassionate appointment upon attaining the age of majority and completing the requisite education.

(3.) On the application dated September 29, 2005, the Superintendent of Police, Firozabad passed an order dated October 15, 2005, saying that her son, the writ petitioner was 12 years old and still shy by 6 years of the age of majority, when he would be eligible for consideration under the Dying-in-Harness Rules. It was said in the order that once the writ petitioner turns 18, upon an application made for the purpose, necessary action would be taken. Upon the writ petitioner turning eighter years, an application seeking compassionate appointment for him was made by his mother, addressed to the Additional Director General of Police/ Director (Telecom), U.P. Police Radio Head Quarters, Lucknow, with copies to other Officers of the Police, mentioned at the foot of the application. The respondents do not seem to acknowledge this application and discount it from their record. Though the respondents say that this application by the writ petitioner's mother was not received, there is a communication dated March 21, 2013, addressed to the State Radio Officer (Administration), U.P., Police Radio Head Quarters, Lucknow from the Superintendent of Police, Firozabad forwarding the said application, as the writ petitioner asserts. A copy of the memo dated March 21, 2013 from the Superintendent of Police, Firozabad addressed to the State Radio Officer, Administration is on record of the writ petition as Annexure No.6.