PRAKASH SINGH BISHT Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAJESH Tandon, J. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground under the U. P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974 according to his qualification in the department. Further prayer has been made for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the entire amount of the petitioner's father which is due in the department.

(2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the father of the petitioner was initially appointed in Public Works Department on the post of Beldar under construction Division, Public Works Department, Ranikhet. He died on 29-11-1997 in harness and at the time of his death he was posted at Bailee/binayak Motor Road, Bhikiyasen, District Almora. 3. The service of the petitioner's father was regularized in the year 1997 in the department after rendering about 16 to 17 years of service. Despite this fact, the wife of the deceased is not being paid family pension till date. 4. After the death of the petitioner's father, the mother of the petitioner moved an application before the respondent No. 3 on 16-12-1997 to release the group insurance amount of the deceased. 5. In this connection, respondent No. 3 wrote a letter to Manager, Group Insurance Unit L. I. C. , Divisional Office, 30 Hazarat Ganj, Lucknow on 26-7-2001 requesting therein to release the group insurance amount of her husband. 6. When no action was taken by the respondents, the wife of the deceased again moved an application before the Hon'ble Minister, Public Works Department, Uttaranchal, Dehradun regarding the amount of group insurance. 7. Thereafter, the other family members of the petitioner issued no objection certificate in favour of the petitioner that they have no objection if the appointment is given to the petitioner in place of his father. reate PDF with GO2pdf for free, if you wish to remove this line, click here to buy Virtual PDF Printer This Software is licensed to: :-REG Copyright Capital Law Infotech 8. On 7th October, 2005 time has been allowed to the respondents to file counter-affidavit, but the same has not yet been filed. 9. The Apex Court in the case of Sushma Gosain v. Union of India and Ors. , (1989) 4 SCC 468, has held as under: "we consider that it must be stated unequivocally that in all claims for appointment on compassionate grounds, there should not be any delay in appointment. The purpose of providing appointment on compassionate ground is to mitigate the hardship due to death of the bread earner in the family. Such appointment should, therefore, be provided immediately to redeem the family in distress. It is improper keep such case pendig for years. If there is no suitable post for appointment supernumerary post should be created to accommodate the applicant. " 10. The Apex Court in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana, (1994) 4 SCC 138, has relied upon the judgment of Sushma Gosain v. Union of India, (1989) 4 SCC 468. The relevant observations are quoted below: "the whole object of granting compassionate employment is thus to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis. The object is not to give a member of such family a post much less a post for post held by the deceased. What is further, mere death of an employee in harness does not entitle his family to such source of livelihood. The Government or the public authority concerned has to examine the financial condition of the family of the deceased, and it is only if it is satisfied, that but for the provision of employment, the family will not be able to meet the crisis that a job is to be offered to the eligible member of the family. " 11. Therefore, as will appear from the aforesaid judgment that the object of the grant of compassionate appointment is to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis. The object is to help the deceased family from starvation and not to make a selection. In the same judgment it has also been observed as under: "it must be remembered in this connection that as against the destitute family of the deceased there are millions of other families which are equally, if not more destitute. The exception to the rule made in ate PDF with GO2pdf for free, if you wish to remove this line, click here to buy Virtual PDF Printer This Software is licensed to: :-REG Copyright Capital Law Infotech favour of the family of the deceased employee is in consideration of the services rendered by him and the legitimate expectations, and the change in the status and affairs, of the family engendered by the erstwhile employment which are suddenly upturned. " 12. In Santosh Kumar Mishra v. State of U. P. , 2001 (4) ESC 1615 (All ). It has been held as under: Learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the case of Raj Narain Prasad (supra), for stressing his submission that the petitioner's father would be deemed to have been a regular Government servant in view of the fact that his appointment has been converted into work charge employee in pursuance of the scheme approved by the Apex Court. He further submitted that in view of the decision rendered in the case of Smt. Pushp Lata Dixit v. Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad and Ors. , 1991 (18) ALR 591, the petitioner is entitled for getting the appointment. In this case, the husband of Smt. Pushp Lata was working as a Paid Apprentice. The plea that he was not a regular employee although he had been working in the department for the last 17 years was not entitled for appointment under Dying in Harness Rule was rejected by the Court and the directions were issued to accommodate the petitioner (Smt. Pushp Lata) according to her qualifications relying upon this case, the writ petition filed by Smt. Maya Devi v. State of U. P and Ors. , 1998 (79) FLR 608, was also allowed in which the High Court found that the petitioner's husband in that case has satisfactorily worked for about 10 years until his death and though he may be a daily wager, the petitioner can be accommodated on compassionate grounds under Dying-in-Harness Rules. In the case of Smt. Saroj Devi v. State of U. P. and Ors. , 1999 (3) ESc 2187 (All), the benefit was given to the temporary appointee as he was working against a substantive vacancy. " "the Apex Court was considering the scheme and the status of a work-charge employee even after being confirmed it has been held that a work charge employee after confirmation does not cease to be a work charge employee and he continues to be a work charge employee. The question of regularization against a regular vacancy was not in issue before the Apex Court. No rule, law of any Government order has been brought to the notice of this Court by the State to indicate that any terminal benefits have been provided to the work charge employee who have to their credit a considerable period of service and even in cases after very longer period of service, they retire as such. Even no provision for confirmation of a work charge employee as a work charge employee is available in the State of Uttar Pradesh nor any such provision has been shown by the learned State Counsel despite being specifically asked for. " 4 Create PDF with GO2pdf for free, if you wish to remove this line, click here to buy Virtual PDF Printer This Software is licensed to: :-REg Copyright Capital Law Infotech "it may also be taken note of that if daily wager or a work charge employee is engaged against a particular duty or post, and that work is of perennial nature, the presumption would be that such an employee would be entitled for being treated to have been continuing against a regular vacancy. " 13. It is well-settled that appointment on the compassionate ground is purely humanitarian consideration because of the fact that family will not be able to make both ends meet. The purpose of providing employment to the dependant of a Government servant dying-in-harness in preference to anybody else is to mitigate hardship caused to the family of the deceased on account of his unexpected death while in service. Thus compassionate appointment is treated to alleviate the distress of the family. 14. In view of the above, the respondents are directed to consider the representation-dated 16-12-1997 of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of presentation of the certified copy of the order releasing entire dues. 15. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. Create PDF with GO2pdf for free, if you wish to remove this line, click here to buy Virtual PDF Printer Order accordingly. .