Allahabad High Court
Km. Shehnaj Begum vs State Of U.P. And Others on 8 July, 2021
Bench: Munishwar Nath Bhandari, Acting Chief Justice, Piyush Agrawal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 29
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 1343 of 2011
Appellant :- Km. Shehnaj Begum
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Manish Kumar Nigam,Pawan Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dr. Y.K. Srivastava,S.C.
Hon'ble Munishwar Nath Bhandari,Acting Chief Justice
Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard Sri Manish Kumar Nigam, learned counsel for the appellant and learned chief standing counsel for the respondents.
By this appeal challenge is made to the judgment dated 26.4.2011 whereby the writ petition was dismissed. It was filed to seek compassionate appointment by the divorced daughter.
The definition of family given under U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules, 1974') was not permitted consideration of application by a married daughter. The learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition in reference to several judgments on the issue. Since there were conflicting judgments of the Division Benches, the matter was referred to the Larger Bench and the questions framed were answered though the issue as to whether divorced daughter can claim compassionate appointment was kept open. The appellant is a divorced daughter and accordingly the prayer is made by the counsel for the appellant to decide the issue about her entitlement to get compassionate appointment.
It is submitted that the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Vimla Srivastava vs. State of U.P and another [2016 (1) ADJ 21 (DB)] struck down the word 'unmarried' appearing in the definition of family. It is to provide consideration of application of married as well as unmarried daughters. After the judgment aforesaid, the State of Uttar Pradesh amended the Rules 1974 to provide consideration to the married daughters also. In the light of the aforesaid, prayer is to set aside the judgment of the Single Bench with acceptance of the writ petition so as the appeal. The respondents may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment.
We have considered the submission made by the counsel for the appellant so as the chief standing counsel.
The petitioner-appellant sought compassionate appointment being a divorced daughter. The application was submitted within the period given under Rule 5 of the Rules, 1974. She was denied compassionate appointment with reference to the definition of 'family' given under Rules 1974. The definition of 'family' was including only unmarried daughter. The petitioner was married but later on divorced. The fact now remains that married as well as unmarried daughter can claim appointment under Rule 1974. It is not only in reference to the judgment of this Court in the case of Smt. Vimla Srivastava (supra) but pursuant to the amended Rules. The Full Bench judgment of this Court would not apply to this case and otherwise the issue in reference to the divorced daughter was kept open. Since the Rules defining the family has been struck down to the extent of use of word 'unmarried', the petitioner is thus entitled to consideration for her appointment on compassionate ground.
In view of the above, judgment of the learned single Judge so as the decision of the respondents are set aside and the appeal is allowed with the direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment as per Rules 1974. It would be within six months from the date of receipt of this order.
Order Date :- 8.7.2021
samz
