RAJAN Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Sudhanshu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent No. 1 and Shri J.N. Maurya, learned counsel for the respondents No. 2 and 3.

(2.) The petitioner claims that he is entitled to be appointed on compassionate grounds in the respondent-corporation. The father of the petitioner was engaged as a muster roll employee in the respondent-corporation who died-in-harness.

(3.) The status of the petitioner's father as a muster roll employee was also noticed by this Court in Writ-C No. 21057 of 2010 (U.P. State Bridge Corporation Limited and another v. U.P. Rajya Setu Nigam Sanyukt Karmchari Sangh and another) and the companion writ petition. The father of the petitioner was a party to the aforesaid writ petitions.