Surya Prakash Gangwar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 12034 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 20
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2718 of 2014
 

 
Petitioner :- Surya Prakash Gangwar
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Agriculture And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sarvesh Kumar Verma,Gaurav Gupta,Jyoti Rajpoot,Pratul Prakash Srivastava,Shailendra Singh Rajawat
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

Heard Sri. S.S. Rajawat, Advocate assisted by Sri Saurabh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sanjeev Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

Brief facts of the case are that the father of the petitioner late Sri Roop Singh Gangwar who was posted at Class-III post under the opposite party No.5 died in harness on 13.08.1991 leaving behind his wife, unmarried daughter and the petitioner. It is not disputed between the parties that the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment under Dying-in-harness Rules in the year 2001 after delay of 10 years.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner was minor at the time of death of his father therefore, after attaining the majority he has moved an application in the year 2001.

The application moved by the petitioner was rejected by the State Government under the U.P. (Recruitment) of Dependents of Government Servants Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Rules, 1974"). Rule 5 (i) of the Rules, 1974 provides that application for compassionate appointment has to be given within five years admittedly in this case the same was not done rather the application was given after ten years, may be because the petitioner was minor. The writ petition has been filed in the year 2014 i.e. after delay of about 14 years. The maximum limit for submitting the application under the Rules was five years. Admittedly, the application was moved after delay of 10 years on that ground, the claim of the petitioner was rejected under the Rules, 1974 as the application submitted by the petitioner was highly time barred. Coupled with the fact that the petitioner filed this petition in the year 2014 after delay of about 14 years. The petition also suffers from delay and laches. The object of providing compassionate appointment under the Rules, 1974 is to provide immediate relief to the distressed family. After lapse of more than 30 years today, it cannot be said that still the petitioner can claim any of his right for being appointed on compassionate ground. For the past more than 30 years, the family of the deceased has survived therefore, it cannot be asserted that any hardship occurred due to the death of the deceased father of the petitioner still subsist.

Learned Standing Counsel has relied on judgment dated 05.04.2023 passed by this Court in Writ A No.6240 of 2012 ( Sunil Kumar vs. State of U.P. & Ors.) and also on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in the case of The State of West Bengal vs. Debabrata Tiwari & Ors. reported in [2023 SCC OnLine SC 219].

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also considering the fact that deceased father of the petitioner died in the year 1991, this Court is of the opinion that no orders can be passed in such matter for providing the appointment on compassionate grounds hence the petition is dismissed. The petition is also dismissed on the grounds of unexplained laches and delay of about 14 years.

Order Date :- 20.4.2023

Saurabh Yadav/-