Disposed

Prerana Devi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC29 Aug 2022WRIA/12165/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge disposed of a writ petition seeking compassionate appointment for the petitioner, her deceased mother-in-law. The court deferred the decision granting a timeframe for the applicant to file a representation before the administrative authority for adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file a representation within eight weeks to be decided by the respondent within two weeks.

Prerana Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 32 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12165 of 2022 Petitioner :- Prerana Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Love Lesh Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional C.S.C. for the respondent no. 2 and 3.

¶4

Through this petition the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:-

¶5

"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the claim of petitioner for being compassionate appointment under the U.P. recruitment of Government servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974

¶6

II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 23.06.2022 (Annexure no.14) with in stipulated period which is pending before the respondent no.3."

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's mother-in-law was posted as ANM in District Hospital Lalitpur who died during service 29.04.2021. The husband of the petitioner has also died on 23.04.2021. The second son of the deceased Anurag Kumar Namdev is a government employee and the daughters of the deceased namely Rakhi Namdev and Ragni Namdev who are married have given their no objection on affidavit before the competent Court in District Lalitpur.

¶8

It further is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is eligible and qualified to be appointed on the compassionate ground in place of her mother-in-law.

¶9

Per contra learned Additional C.S.C. has opposed the petition submitting that the other son of the deceased is admittedly government employee and therefore no case is made out in favour of the petitioner.

¶10

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the other son is living separately and his status of government employee does not forfeit the candidature of the petitioner.

¶11

At this stage learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner would be redressed if her pending representation is directed to be decided by the competent authority within a stipulated time period.

¶12

On due consideration to the argument advanced as well as perusal of the record, it is provided that in case the petitioner files a representation before respondent no. 2 within a period of eight weeks from today, the same shall be decided within a period of further two weeks by passing a reasoned and speaking order.

¶13

In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 29.8.2022/RC

¶15

Digitally signed by RAM CHANDER YADAV Date: 2022.08.31 17:18:20 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Prerana Devi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prerana Devi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharmendra Kumar Singh Vs Director of Education(Secondary) and 2 Others

Smt.Nirmala Devi and Another Vs the Union of India and 3 Others

Harshit Prakash Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bansh Gopal Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sitara Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Smt. Rukmani Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others