RAMESH CHANDRA PARIHAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is husband of late Smt. Shiv Kanwar, who was serving as a Teacher in the Rajasthan Balika Uchcha Prathmik Vidyalaya, Kar mawas, Samdari (Banner) but had unfortunately died on 9.3.1995. The petitioner has moved this writ petition for invoking the benefit under Rule 5 of the Rajasthan (Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying While in Service) Rules, 1975 (referred to hereinafter as 'the Rules of 1975') with the prayer that the petitioner being the member of family of the deceased employee and being an unemployed is entitled to be given a suitable employment in the Government service. He states that he was entitled to such appointment on compassionate grounds under the provisions of the Rules of 1975. He had moved an application on 17.4.1995 vide Annex. 2. He possesses the qualification of post graduation degree of M.A. obtained from Jai Narain Vyas University, Jodhpur. Despite repeated approaches he has not been favoured with the appointment and, therefore, he has filed the present petition for the relief.

(2.) NOTICE was issued to the respondents and the respondents had filed a reply. It is not denied that the petitioner is the husband of late Smt. Shiv Kanwar who had died while in service, However, it is stated in the reply that during the life time of the deceased Smt. Shiv Kanwar, the petitioner had wholly bad, unjustified and inhuman relations with his wife. The wife was always under the apprehension that the petitioner would snatch away her ornaments. It is also stated in the reply that the wife had been alleging time and again that the petitioner had been beating her repeatedly and even turned her our from the house. The wife of the petitioner had made allegations against the petitioner and submitted number of applications to the department, copies of some of the applications have been attached as Annexs. R.1 to R.3 to the written -statement. Even a First Information Report was also recorded against the petitioner being F.I.R. No. 78/95 under the provisions of Section 498A I.P.C. The petitioner was also required to produce succession cetificate to be submitted to the department for certain other purposes but the petitioner was not able to obtain even a succession certificate from the Court. It is submitted by the respondents that the provisions of the Rules of 1975 are to be invoked as a compassionate grounds and for awarding relief to such persons who are in dire need of the assistance and whose life is jeopardised because of the death of the earning member of the family.

(3.) FOR the reasons mentioned above, no fault can be found with the decision of the Government in not awarding any benefit to the petitioner and the writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. No orders as to costs.