Rajasthan High Court
Jairam Adopted S/O Late Shri Sumer ... vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 25 January, 2023
Bench: Sudesh Bansal
[2023/RJJP/000563]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1306/2023
Jairam Adopted S/o Late Shri Sumer Singh, Aged About 28 Years, R/o
Bakoti Post Bilwa, Teh. Ketri, Distt. Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Deputy Secretary, Department Of
Personnel (Group-2), Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Secretary, Department Of Education, Govt. Secretariat,
Jaipur.
3. The Director, Elementary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner.
4. The District Education Officer (Headquarter), Elementary
Education, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
5. The Block Chief Education Officer, Khetri, District Jhunjhunu.
6. The Principal Govt. Sr. Secondary School, Beelwa, Tehsil
Khetri, District Jhunjhunu.
7. Director, Department Of State Insurance And Provident Fund,
Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur.
8. Director, Department Of Pension And Pensioners Welfare,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Pal Jadoun with
Mr. Aditya Gaur
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
25/01/2023
1. Petitioner has field this instant writ petition under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, praying for grant of compassionate
appointment on the post of LDC in place of Shri Sumer Singh
under the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents
of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996.
2. Petitioner claims himself to be the adopted son of deceased
Sumer Singh who died on 5.7.2022 while in service and in support
of proof of adoption, petitioner has placed reliance on an
[2023/RJJP/000563] (2 of 3) [CW-1306/2023]
unregistered document dated 29.3.2018 (Annexure-2) and
affidavit of witnesses to this document have also been filed.
Petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment passed by the
Coordinate Bench of this Court in Pankaj Vs. State of
Rajasthan, SB Civil Writ Petition No.6066/2007 decided on
16.5.2012.
3. Respondents have observed that no authentic document of
adoption has been placed on record and document of adoption
produced by petitioner is not registered, therefore, for want of any
proof of adoption, application seeking compassionate
appointment, has been dismissed vide order dated 21.10.2022.
4. Having heard counsel for petitioner and from perusal of
record, it is not in dispute that petitioner does not have any
registered adoption deed in his favour, however, learned counsel
for petitioner states that a civil suit for declaration of adoption is
pending. In order to prove a legal adoption, petitioner is required
to prove conditions as enshrined under Section 11 of the Hindu
Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. Presumption of adoption is
permissible only on the basis of registered documents as
envisaged under Section 16 of the Act of 1956. It is not the
jurisdiction of respondents-authorities to examine the validity of
ceremony of adoption, with the appreciation of affidavits of
witnesses even if adoption is taken place according to customs
and rights by the performance of ceremony of giving and taking
and not by way of registered adoption, the jurisdiction lies with
the Civil Court to determine the issue of adoption. In the present
case, the petitioner admittedly neither possess the registered
[2023/RJJP/000563] (3 of 3) [CW-1306/2023]
adoption deed and his civil suit seeking declaration of adoption is
still pending.
5. In case of Pankaj (supra), the District Education Officer
himself entered into the arena of disbelieving on the ceremony of
adoption as also observed that petitioner was the sole son of
natural parents and could not have been adopted. In that
situation, the Coordinate Bench of this Court observed that the
District Education Officer travelled beyond its jurisdiction. As far as
ratio of law that adoption is not necessarily to be effected only by
way of registered instrument, there is no more res integra but in
the present case at hand, petitioner has already instituted a civil
suit seeking declaration of his adoption, hence, the issue of
adoption is sub-judiced before the Civil Court. Therefore, there is
no cause of action to assail the impugned order dated 21.10.2022
at this stage.
6. As a result, there is no force in the writ petition and same is
hereby dismissed.
7. All pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J
NITIN /41
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
