GULAM GAUSUL AZAM Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ petition is aggrieved by the order dated 21.11.2011 whereby the retiral and other dues of late Abdul Kareem, father of petitioner no. 1 have been with held and the order dated 1.3.2012 whereby the claim for compassionate appointment made by the petitioner no. 1 has been rejected.

(2.) The case of the respondents is that late Abdul Kareem obtained appointment in the Revenue Department as Lekhpal and he was sent for training of Lekhpal but thereafter it was alleged that the petitioner alongwith some other persons had obtained the appointment by concealment of facts and practicing fraud, therefore their services were terminated under the U.P. Temporary Government Service (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975. This order was challenged by the petitioner alongwith others in Writ Petition No. 1131 (S/S) of 1994 in which late Abdul Kareem was petitioner no. 4 and the writ petition was allowed on the ground that the services of the petitioner could be terminated after giving notice and after following the principles of natural justice. Against the judgment of the High Court dated 16.2.2000 a Special Appeal was filed which was dismissed on 8.10.2003. Thereafter a charge sheet was issued to the petitioner on 20.5.2010 and departmental proceedings held against him. The enquiry officer submitted his report on 30.6.2011 which was received in the office of Deputy District Magistrate, Deoria on 3.7.2011 but on 15.7.2011 Abdul Kareem died. In this view of the matter, no departmental action against late Abdul Kareem could be concluded.

(3.) Nevertheless, the disciplinary authority has proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 21.11.2011 holding that since the charges against late Abdul Kareem had already been proved in the enquiry proceedings and it had been established that late Abdul Kareem had obtained the appointment by fraudulent means, therefore, he would not be entitled to any retiral benefits. This order has been challenged in the present writ petition. Subsequently, the claim for compassionate appointment of the petitioner no. 1 as son of late Abdul Kareem has also been rejected by the second impugned order dated 1.3.2012.