JAGDISH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE case of the petitioner in this petition is that his mother Smt. Shanti was in Government service as a Sweeper (Class IV employee ). She was working for the Municipal Board, Bhinmal. She was a permanent employee working with Municipal Board, Bhinmal. She died on 5th July 1993 while in service. On her death the petitioner applied for job as a Sweeper in accordance with the provisions of the Rajasthan (Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying While in Service Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules' ). This application was made on 18. 08. 1993.

(2.) THE petitioner also filed an affidavit dated 28. 08. 1993 stating that his mother Shanti was a permanent employee of respondent No. 2 on the post of Sweeper, she died on 5. 07. 1993. Shanti had left behind four children, including the petitioner. THE petitioner alone was living with Shanti at the time of her death and other children had separated during the lifetime of Shanti. THE other children of Shanti were not making any claim for appointment in lieu of death of their mother. Vide order dated 23. 08. 1993. the petitioner was given appointment to the post of Sweeper, as per the 1975 Rules. THE petitioner joined duties in pursuance of the said appointment order.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to a decision of this Court in Gulshan Chopra vs. State of Rajasthan and others (1), where a learned Single Judge of this Court had taken a similar view. The judgment of the Single Judge was upheld by the Division Bench as the appeal against the said judgment filed by the Government was dismissed. It is to be seen that the key words for the purpose of deciding the controversy in the present case are "dependant on the deceased Government Servant" as contained in the definition of the word "family" contained in sub-rule (f) of Rule 2 of the 1975 Rules. When both the parents are in Government employment and are living together, and the son is also living with the parents as part of the family, it cannot be said that the son is dependant only on one of the parents, i. e. the father.