Rehana Parveen vs State Of U.P. Thru ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 605 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 18
 

 
Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 7385 of 2017
 

 
Petitioner :- Rehana Parveen
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. (Medical) Civil Sectt.Lko.& Anr.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Pankaj Gupta,Om Prakash Vishwakarma
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J.

The instant writ petition has been filed for issuance a writ, order of direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 10.02.2017 passed by opposite party no.2. It is further prayed that for issuing a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground ignoring the order date 10.02.2017.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a married daughter of the deceased employee. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had applied for the employment under the dying in harness Rules on the compassionate ground but her application was rejected since she was married daughter and she is not entitled for the employment under the dying in harness rules as she was not considered as a family of the deceased employee.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that now the Rules have already been amended in the year 2019 and the married daughter has been included under the definition of the family of the deceased. He has further submitted that there are several judgments of this Hon'ble Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court which holds that the married daughter is also a family member of the deceased for the purpose of the employment under the dying in harness Rules.

Mr. Udai Veer Singh, Learned Chief Standing Counsel has not opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and has submitted that the law is settled.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submitted that the petitioner make a fresh representation to the opposite party no.2 i.e. Chief Medical Officer for appointment under the dying in harness rules and the CMO may pass appropriate order in accordance with amended Act.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation to the Chief Medical Officer within 10 days from today and on the receipt of the said representation along with a copy of this order, the CMO is directed to pass a fresh order ignoring the impugned order dated 10.02.2017 in accordance with law within 45 days.

With the aforesaid directions, the instant petition is disposed of.

Order Date :- 11.1.2021

C.M.V.