Allahabad High Court
Chhotey Lal S/O Sukh Lal vs State Of U P Thr.Prin.Secy.P W D ... on 9 October, 2023
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:65107
Court No. - 20
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7753 of 2011
Petitioner :- Chhotey Lal S/O Sukh Lal
Respondent :- State Of U P Thr.Prin.Secy.P W D Civil Sectt.And 3 Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- O P Tiwari,Km. Vishwa Mohini,Vimal Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties.
2. Petition has been filed seeking a direction to opposite parties to consider regularization of petitioner's father, late Sukh Lal, from the date his juniors were regularized in service and thereafter to consider petitioner for compassionate appointment in term of prevailing rules. Further prayer for quashing of Government Order dated 29.01.2003 and for arrears of salary of petitioner's father alongwith interest have also been made.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for petitioner does not press the second and third prayers and is emphasing only for a direction to opposite parties for considering petitioner's case for compassionate appointment in terms of judgment rendered by Division bench of this Court in the case of State of U.P. & Ors. versus Kuldeep Thakur, 2017 (35) Lucknow Civil Decision 696.
4. The sole ground for rejecting the appointment of petitioner under Dying in Harness Rules is that the father of petitioner was working as Chowkidar in Workcharge Establishment and his services were not regularized and, therefore, since he was not a regular Government servant, none of his family member could be appointed under the Dying in Harness Rules.
5. Learned counsel for petitioner relied upon the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of U.P. and others. Vs. Kuldeep Thakur [2017 (35) LCD 696]. In para-13 and 15 of the said decision, this Court has held as follows:-
"13. Apart from this, in the present case those who were at par with the father of the respondents had been extended the benefit of regularization. This distinguishing feature therefore is in addition to the issues involved in the case of Pawan Kumar Yadav (supra) and consequently, the claim of the respondent petitioner was at least entitled for consideration by the State Government in the light of the observations made hereinabove.
15. Consequently, we modify the judgment dated 22.11.2016 to the extent that it shall be open to the appellant State to consider the status of regularization of the father of the respondent and then proceed to take an appropriate decision with regard to the claim of the respondent petitioner for compassionate appointment in the light of the observations made hereinabove."
6. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that father of the petitioner was working as Chowkidar initially on daily wages and thereafter in Workcharge Establishment from the year 1988 and, therefore, he was entitled to be regularized under the Regularization Rules as amended from time to time. The said judgment clearly holds that in case a person becomes entitled for regularization, it is incumbent upon the authorities to consider him for regularization. If on consideration services of father of petitioner becomes regular, then petitioner would be entitled for being considered for appointment under Dying in Harness Rules. The right of father of petitioner could not be denied merely because of inaction or absence of timely and prompt action by the State authorities.
7. In view of aforesaid, opposite parties are directed to take an appropriate decision with regard to claim of petitioner for compassionate appointment in the light of the aforesaid judgment in Kuldeep Thakur's case (supra) as well as the observations made hereinabove. Such an exercise shall be completed by the opposite parties expeditiously and within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before the opposite party No.4.
8. Writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 9.10.2023
Subodh/-
