Dismissed

Subhawati Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2022WRIA/11986/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of a claim for compassionate appointment. Relying on Supreme Court and Full Bench precedents, the court held that daily wage workers without permanent or substantive posts are not government servants eligible for such appointments.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as the petitioner, being a daily wage worker without a regular post, is not eligible for compassionate appointment.

Subhawati Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11986 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Subhawati Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sandeep Maniji Bakhshi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no.1 to 4.

¶6

Under challenge is the impugned order dated Nil passed by the Executive Engineer, Construction Division, Public Works Department, Bansi, Sidhharthnagar, by which the representation/claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment in place of her deceased husband has been rejected.

¶7

It is not disputed between the parties that husband of the petitioner late Ram Prasad was appointed as daily wager employee (Meth) on 16.01.1988. He never held temporary/permanent or substantive post.

¶8

U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying In Harness Rules, 1974 governs the mode and manner in which compassionate appointment to the dependant of deceased government servant is to be given. Rule 2(a) defines "Government servant" as a Government servant employed in connection with the affairs of Uttar Pradesh, who was permanent in such employment; or though temporary had been regularly appointed in such employment; or though not regularly appointed had put in three years continuous service in regular vacancy in such employment.

¶9

Admittedly the petitioner was appointed and working as daily wages employee.

¶10

Law in this regard has been settled by Apex Court in General Manager, Uttaranchal Jal Sansthan Vs. Laxmi Devi and others (2009) 7 SCC 205, wherein it has been held that daily wage workers do not work on a post and in fact a daily wage employee cannot work on a regular vacancy. Thus, he cannot claim to be appointed on compassionate ground in case he is a daily wage employee.

¶11

The judgment in the case General Manager, Uttaranchal Jal

¶12

Sansthan (supra) has been followed by Full Bench of this Court in Pawan Kumar Yadav V. State of U.P. and others 2010 (5) ESC 3025 (All) (FB) wherein issue before the Full Bench was "Whether a daily wager and work charge employee, employed in connection with the affairs of Uttar Pradesh, who is not holding any post whether substantive or temporary is a "Government Servant" within the meaning of Rule 2(a) of UP. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974.

¶13

Full bench of this Court of three judges has answered and decided the issue as follows.

¶14

"A daily wager and work-charge employee employed in connection with the affairs of the Uttar Pradesh, who is not holding any post, whether substantive or temporary and is not appointed in any regular vacancy, even if he was working for more than 3 years, is not a "Government Servant" within the meaning of Rule 2(a) of U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servant (Dying in harness) Rules, 1974, and thus his dependents on his death in harness are not entitled to compassionate appointment under these rules".

¶15

In view of settled law, I find no illegality in the impugned order as contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed.

¶16

Order Date :- 6.9.2022

¶17

T.S.

¶18

Digitally signed by TRIBHUWAN SINGH Date: 2022.09.09 15:37:33 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Subhawati Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhawati Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bharat Ji Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Dr. Jwala Prasad Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sujeet Kumar Singh Vs State of U P and Another

Aayush Taumar Vs the Union of India and 4 Others

Lala Ram Vs the State of U.P. and 8 Others