Allahabad High Court
Pratigya Tiwari @ Partigya Tiwari vs State Of U.P.Thru.Secy.Medical & ... on 23 February, 2021
Bench: Chandra Dhari Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 20
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 5095 of 2021
Petitioner :- Pratigya Tiwari @ Partigya Tiwari
Respondent :- State Of U.P.Thru.Secy.Medical & Health Services & Anr.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Shitla Prasad Tripathi,Deepti Singh,Praveen Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.
The petition seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing impugned order dated 23.12.2020 passed by respondent no.2/Chief Medical Officer, Barabanki, which is appended with the petition as Annexure - 3.
The petition also seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds on appropriate post under U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servant Dying in Harness Rules, 1974.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that mother of the petitioner Late Shakuntara Devi was appointed on 04.07.1986 on the post of Basic Health Worker (Female) at I.C.P.S. Sub-Centre, Fatehganj, under Primary Health Centre, Barabanki. It is submitted that petitioner's mother died on 05.05.2018 while working as Basic Health Worker leaving behind her husband (petitioner's father) and three daughters, including the petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner's father and her sisters have given no objection for compassionate appointment of the petitioner, which is appended with the petition as Annexure - 2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that claim of the petitioner has been rejected by the competent authority vide impugned order 23.12.2020 (supra) only on the ground that the petitioner is a married daughter, therefore, she is not entitled for the compassionate appointment. Learned counsel has relied upon a judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Mrs. Vinay Kumari v. State of U.P. & Anr. - 2021 (2) ADJ 82 (LB) and submitted that the law is settled that under Section 2C of dying in harness rules, the petitioner/married daughter is also included in the 'member of family'.
Learned counsel has submitted that in view of the above, the impugned order dated 23.12.2020 passed by respondent no.2 is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the law settled and deserves to be quashed.
Per Contra, learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the petition on merit, however has acceded to the legal position laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. I have also perused the judgment passed in Mrs. Vinay Kumari's case (supra).
From perusal of the judgment passed in Mrs. Vinay Kumari's case (supra), it is evident that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered to that of Mrs. Vinay Kumari's case (supra). It is now well settled that under Section 2C of dying in harness rules, the petitioner/married daughter is also included in the 'member of family'.
In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed.
Impugned order dated 23.12.2020 (Annexure - 3) passed by respondent no.2/Chief Medical Officer, Barabanki is hereby quashed.
A mandamus is issued to the respondent no.2/Chief Medical Officer, Barabanki to consider the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment afresh in terms of judgment rendered in Mrs. Vinay Kumari's case (supra) within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order.
No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 23.2.2021
nishant/-
