Allowed

Brijesh Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC27 Jul 2021WRIA/5707/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition against State of U.P. regarding compassionate appointment. Directed respondents to consider petitioner for appointment based on qualifications acquired during pendency of application within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents to consider petitioner for appointment based on qualifications acquired during pendency of application within two months.

Brijesh Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5707 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Pratap Pal,Deepak Kumar Pal

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

The present petition has been filed alleging that the petitioner being eligible applied for appointment on compassionate grounds on account of death of the brother of the petitioner. It is claimed that when the application was filed, the petitioner had intermediate education. Subsequently, during the pendency of the application for consideration of appointment, the petitioner had acquired graduation degree also and as such approached the respondents for considering the petitioner for appointment commensurate to the educational qualification of the petitioner acquired during the pendency of the said application.

¶7

The respondents have taken a stand that the consideration of the application of the petitioner will be on the date when the application was filed and on the qualification which the applicant possessed on the date of filing of the application.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment of this Court in Special Appeal Defective No. 620 of 2018, judgment dated 14.9.2018, whereby the Division Bench of this Court considered the scope of Rule 5 of the Rules of 1974 to hold that in terms of the said Rule, the application has to be considered for appointment on the post suitable.

¶9

Learned counsel for the respondents has brought before this Court the fact that mother of the petitioner has given a letter that her second son be considered for appointment.

¶10

This Court is not going into the question of eligibility of the person for appointment, however, the petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds, and take a decision keeping in view the judgment of this Court dated 14.9.2018 passed in Special Appeal Defective No. 620 of 2018 and they shall not take a decision based upon the qualification which the applicant possessed at the time of filing of the such application for the first time. The decision for appointment of the petitioner shall be taken as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of filing of the application.

¶11

The writ petition is disposed off.

¶12

Copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court shall be accepted/treated as certified copy of this order.

¶13

Order Date :- 27.7.2021 S. Rahman

Brijesh Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brijesh Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhuvneshwar Dayal Tyagi Vs Union of India and Another

Pratibha Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anil Kumar Jain Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Sumitra Devi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Kanti Devi Vs Deputy Director of Education (Secondary) and 2 Others

Dharmendra Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others