Uttarakhand High Court
WPSS/1820/2019 on 21 March, 2023
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
SL. proceedings or
Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
WPSS No.1820 of 2019
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. S.C. Bhatt, Advocate for the
petitioner.
Mr. C.S. Rawat, Chief Standing
Counsel with Mr. Narain Dutt, Brief
Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.
Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Advocate for
respondent no.5.
Heard learned counsel for the
parties.
Petitioner's father Amar Singh was
serving as Head Constable in Police
Department in District Nainital, who died
while in service on 21.12.2016. Soon
after death of his father, petitioner
applied for compassionate appointment.
Before any decision could be taken on
petitioner's application, respondent no. 5
also applied for compassionate
appointment contending that she is the
legally wedded wife of late Amar Singh.
In view of competing claims by two
persons for compassionate appointment,
the authorities have not taken any
decision in the matter.
It is not in dispute that petitioner is
born out of the first marriage of late
Amar Singh with Smt. Rani Devi, who
passed away on 08.07.2014.
Respondent no. 5 claims to have married
to late Amar Singh in a temple on
07.12.2015. Respondent no. 5 contends
that she applied for succession certificate
and her application was partly allowed
and learned Senior Civil Judge, Haldwani
vide order dated 17.02.2018 directed
that 50% of the terminal dues of late
Amar Singh should be released in favour
of respondent no. 5 and the remaining
50% should be given to the petitioner.
Based on the judgment rendered by
learned Senior Civil Judge, learned
counsel for respondent no. 5 submits
that since respondent no. 5 has been
declared as successor of late Amar Singh
for getting terminal dues, therefore, she
is also eligible for compassionate
appointment.
Per contra, learned counsel for the
petitioner contends that proceedings
under Section 373 of Indian Succession
Act are summary in nature, in which
validity of marriage is not gone into.
Learned counsel for the petitioner refers
to paragraph no. 9 of the order passed
by learned Senior Civil Judge, where it is
observed that proceedings for grant of
succession certificate are summary in
nature. He further submits that even
going by the said order, petitioner has
been declared to get 50% of the terminal
dues. He further contends that the order
passed by learned Senior Civil Judge has
been challenged by petitioner in Appeal,
which is pending before this Court. He
further points out that respondent no. 5
cannot be said to be legally wedded wife
of petitioner's father as, according to her
own statement made before Police
Authorities, on 25.05.2017, at the time
of her alleged marriage with petitioner's
father, her marriage with first husband
was subsisting and her first husband was
alive. He further points out that father
of the petitioner had named petitioner as
his nominee in his G.P.F. account, which
is evident from the document annexed
as Annexure No.3 to the writ petition.
This Court finds some substance in
the submission made by learned counsel
for the petitioner. The succession
certificate granted in favour of
respondent no. 5 cannot be said to be
conclusive proof regarding validity of her
marriage with petitioner's father. On the
other hand, petitioner's paternity is not
in dispute and petitioner is born out of
the first marriage of late Amar Singh
with Smt. Rani Devi.
Without delving any further in the
matter, this Court thinks that ends of
justice would be met, if the Competent
Authority in the Police Department is
directed to examine the competing
claims of petitioner as well as respondent
no. 5 in terms of Rule 7 of Dying-In-
Harness Rules, 1974 and to take a
decision, within some specified
timeframe.
Accordingly, the writ petition is
disposed of by permitting petitioner as
well as respondent no. 5 to submit their
respective claim in writing before S.S.P.,
Nainital, within three weeks. It shall be
open to them to enclose all documents in
respect of their respective claims. The
S.S.P. concerned shall consider the claim
made by petitioner and respondent no. 5
and pass appropriate order, as per law,
within a period of eight weeks thereafter.
Before taking any decision,
concerned S.S.P. shall provide personal
hearing to both the claimants, if
requested by them.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
21.03.2023
Arpan
