SARNAWATI Vs. VISHAL ALIAS GOLU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) J. C. S. Rawat, J. 1. This special appeal under Rule 5 Chapter VIII of the High Court Rules has been filed against the judgment and order dated 02-03-2006 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 4619/2001 (S/s), Vishal alias Golu Vs. State of Uttaranchal & others, whereby the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and directed the respond ents to reconsider the case of the peti tioner Vishal alias Golu for the appoint ment under Dying-in-Harness Rules within a period of six weeks.

(2.) A Writ petition bearing No. 4619/ 2001 (S/s) was filed before the learned Single Judge by the writ petition-Vishal alias (Now respondent No. 1 in the present special appeal) for the fol lowing reliefs : (a) To issue an order, direction or writ in the nature of certiorari calling the service record and quashing the appointment of the respondent no. 3 made by the respondent no. 2 on the compas sionate ground in the District Mahila Hospital Dehradun, as a Sweeper. (b) To issue an order, direction or writ in the nature mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1 & 2 to make fresh appoint ment of the petitioner on com passionate ground in place of respondent no. 3. (c) To issue an order, direction or writ in the nature which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. (d) award the cost of the petition to the petitioner.

(3.) SMT. Sarnawati- appellant had filed the counter affidavit denying the averments made in the writ petition. It was alleged in the counter affidavit that all the benefits on account of death of Kamal Singh were given to the petitioner and she has merely received the com passionate appointment and as such there is no reason to cancel her appoint ment. It is wrong to say that the re marriage of SMT: Sarnawati will loose the right of compassionate appointment. There is no agreement between SMT. Sarnawati and the petitioner or with the department that she will not marry again and thus the compassionate appoint ment cannot be cancelled merely on the ground that she had again married.