KUSUM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. Heard Sri Surendra Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Syed Fahim holding brief of Sri Anurag Khanna appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and learned Standing counsel for the respondent No.1. No counter affidavit has been filed despite time being granted vide order dated 14.2.2007. In the facts and circumstances, no purpose shall be served by granting further time to the respondents to file counter affidavit as no factual dispute is involved. The writ petition can be disposed of even without counter affidavit in view of the settled law on the legal point involved.

(2.) The husband of the petitioner Sri Mukesh Kumar Sharma was working as an electrician on daily wages with Meerut Development Authority since 1989. He died in harness on 21.5.2006 while working as such. On his death, the petitioner claimed compassionate appointment under the U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974. The petitioner's application for compassionate appointment has been rejected vide impugned order dated 15.11.2006 passed by the Secretary, Meerut Development Authority on the ground that the benefit under the aforesaid rules is not available to the dependents of daily wage employees. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon decision of this Court dated 7.3.2006 passed in Writ Petition No. 13578 of 2006 (Smt. Rampati Vs State of U.P & others) which has been filed as Annexure 6 to the writ petition. The Court placing reliance upon series of decisions held that the authorities cannot refuse to grant the benefit of Dying in Harness Rules to the dependents of the deceased employees on the ground that the deceased employee was working on daily wages and was not permanent. Accordingly, the impugned order refusing grant of compassionate appointment was quashed and the authorities were directed to reconsider the matter afresh. The petitioner's case is squarely covered by the aforesaid decision. The petitioner was admittedly working as a daily wager with the Meerut Development Authority since 1989 till his death on 21.5.2006 i.e. for about 17 years. Therefore, for all practical purposes he had acquired permanency in service for the purposes of Dying in Harness Rules.

(3.) Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the above judgment and order dated 7.3.2006 passed in Writ Petition No. 13578 of 2006 (Smt. Rampati vs. State of U.P. & Ors.). The impugned order dated 15.11.2006 (Annexure 5 to the writ petition) is quashed and the respondent No.3 is directed to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order afresh as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.