GEETA SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -Heard Sri Niraj Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) LEARNED standing counsel, who represents the respondents, was granted one month's time to file a counter-affidavit, but no counter-affidavit has been filed. The petitioner has brought to the notice of the Court various judgments by which the controversy raised in this petition "whether the daughter-in-law who becomes a member of her husband's family after marriage is included within the definition of family of her father-in-law" has been set at rest.

(3.) IN the relevant documents relating to payment of pensionary benefits, G.P.F., Gratuity etc., the petitioner, daughter-in-law, has been shown as one of the nominees of late Sri Anil Kumar Singh. It appears that the matter was referred to the State Government after submitting the application by mother-in-law, Smt. Naina Singh for appointment of the petitioner, daughter-in-law of late Anil Kumar Singh, which was rejected on the ground that daughter-in-law cannot be treated to be a family member of the deceased employee. The daughter-in-law does not become the family member according to the definition clause of U. P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants (Dying in Harness) Rules, 1974, as it has not been included in the definition of the family.