KM LATA GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 27.10.2003 passed by the State Government as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition and for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite parties to appoint the petitioner on suitable post under Dying-in-Harness Rules. The petitioner has further prayed for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite parties to pay the dues of the father of the petitioner like arrears of salary in new pay scale, leave encashment of 65 days, arrears of House Allowance, G.P.F., Gratuity and other dues to the petitioner.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that her father was working as Junior Engineer in U. P. Jal Nigam and he was posted at Kashipur in district Nainital. The father of the petitioner died in harness on 9/10.6.1982 in a road accident. The mother of the petitioner also died in the said accident. The petitioner was the only child of her parent and she was only six months old at the time of death of her parents. The petitioner is getting the family pension. After attaining the age of majority, the petitioner moved an application for giving, her appointment on 6.8.2001. The copy of the said application is Annexure-6 and the reminder is Annexure-7 to this writ petition. The authorities of the Jal Nigam referred the matter to the U. P. Government for giving the relaxation in time limit in moving the application for appointment and the State Government has rejected the application of the petitioner stating that the application was moved after 17 years of the death of her father. It is alleged that the amount of Rs. 7.320 only has been sanctioned as gratuity. However, Rs. 9,457.88 has been shown as advance and the rest of the amount of Rs. 2,137.88 is being recovered from the family pension of the petitioner. It is alleged that till date the payment of arrears of salary in new pay scale and arrears of house allowance, G.P.F. etc. has not been paid to the petitioner. The petitioner made several representations for payment of the alleged dues but till date no action has been taken by the opposite parties. The copy of the representation of the petitioner for payment of dues is dated 26.12.2003 (Annexure-9).

(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the opposite parties, I find that the father of the petitioner died in the year 1982 and the petitioner is claming the appointment under dying in harness in the year 2004 after a gap of 22 years and the State Government has rejected the representation on the ground that the application for appointment under Dying in Harness Rules has been moved after a gap of 17 years. I am of the view that there is no ground to interfere in the impugned order in view of the law settled by the Supreme Court in the matter of the appointment in Dying-in-Harness.