Disposed

Amrendra Singh Gautam v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC18 May 2022WRIA/7589/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner sought compassionate appointment following his father's death during a W.P. challenging termination. The High Court found pending reference useful and directed the Additional Director General of Police (Establishment), Lucknow, to consider the claim and pass a reasoned order within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent-3 to consider the claim for compassionate appointment and pass a reasoned order within six weeks.

Amrendra Singh Gautam Vs State of U.P. and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7589 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Amrendra Singh Gautam Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sarveshwar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Sarveshwar Singh, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel representing respondents- 1 to 6.

¶6

Petitioner has approached this Court for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner on a suitable post commensurate with his qualifications in accordance with Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of. Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974.

¶7

Record shows that father of petitioner was appointed as Sub Inspector in Civil Police, U.P. He was ultimately, terminated from his services vide order dated 13.10.1996. Feeling aggrieved by above order dated 13.10.996, father of the petitioner approached this Court by means of Writ A No. 21184 of 1997 (S.I. (C.P) Jageshwar Singh Gautam Vs. Inspector General of Police Alld Zone and Others. During pendency of aforementioned writ petition, father of petitioner died on 28.4.2002. Ultimately, aforesaid writ petition was allowed vide order dated 20.5.2016.

¶8

In the submission of learned counsel for petitioner, the order dated 20.5.2016, passed by this Court shall relate to 28.4.2022 i.e. the date on which father of petitioner was terminated from service. Resultantly, father of petitioner shall be deemed to be in service on the date of his death. Consequently, petitioner being dependent of his father is entitled for grant of compassionate appointment,

¶9

Learned Standing Cousnel contends that grievance of petitioner has to be considered by respondent-3 Additional Director General of Police (Establishement) U.P. Lucknow, at the first instance. He, therefore, contends that interest of justice shall be served in case a direction is issued to respondent-3 to consider the claim of petitioner for grant of compassionate in accordance with law within a time bound period.

¶10

Having heard Mr. Sarveshwar Singh, learned counsel for

¶11

petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondents- 1 to 6, and upon perusal of record this Court finds that no useful purpose shall be served i keeping this writ petition pending. Interest of justice shall be served in case a direction is issued to respondent-3 to consider the claim of petitioner in accordance with law, in a time bound manner.

¶12

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of finally with a direction to respondent-3 Additional Director General of Police (Establishement) U.P. Lucknow to consider the claim of petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment, in accordance with law and the observations made herein above, by a reasoned and speaking order, within a period of six weeks from the date of presentation of a certified of this order.

¶13

Order Date :- 18.5.2022 Arshad

¶14

Digitally signed by ARSHAD MAHMOOD Date: 2022.05.20 18:24:49 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amrendra Singh Gautam v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amrendra Singh Gautam v. State of U.P. and 6 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

Mahendra Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Avanish Tripathi and 11 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Seema Sarowar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Surendra Pal Saxena Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Rajat Kumar Saxena Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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