KALAWATI Vs. CHIEF NAGAR OFFICER NAGAR NIGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 19.1.2002 passed by the opposite party No. 3 as contained in Annexure-1 and further for a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to appoint the petitioner on any class IV post and pay her salary regularly.

(3.) Petitioner claims appointment under the Dying-in-Harness Rules. The husband of the petitioner was working as daily wage employee in Lucknow Nagar Nigam as Safayee Karamchari who died on 1.8.2001. Petitioner being wife of the deceased applied for appointment under the Dying-in-Harness Rules, which are applicable in the case of the petitioner. The petitioner has filed the copy of U.P. Government Servant Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 and averred in the petition that these Rules are applicable in the matters of employees of Nagar Nigam. The application for appointment has been rejected by Regional Health Officer, Nagar Nigam, Lucknow by Annexure-1 on the ground that under the Rules there is no provision for providing employment to the dependents of deceased daily wagers. The petitioner alleged in para 6 of the petition that the Rules pertaining to appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules cover those employees who were working against the regular vacancy. It is also averred in the writ petition that the deceased husband of the petitioner was not given regular appointment but he had worked against the regular vacancy continuously three years and therefore the petitioner is entitled for the compassionate appointment under the said Rules. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in Sunil Kumar v. State of U.P., 2003 (3) AWC 2224 : 2003 (1) UPLBEC 489, in which Rule 2 of U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974 which defines "Government Servant", has been interpreted by this Court. It has been held that the Rule 2 of the said Rules takes within its ambit employees even if not regularly appointed who were in service continuously for three years in regular vacancy.