Gaurav Kumar Vs the State of U.P. and 2 Others

Court No. - 38

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3428 of 2022

Petitioner :- Gaurav Kumar Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shashi Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Shashi Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶6

Challenge has been raised to the order dated 30.12.2021 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Ghiror, Mainpuri whereby the petitioner's application for grant of compassionate appointment as fair price shop agent, has been rejected.

¶7

Perusal of that order reveals that the same has been rejected on account of non-production of bank passbook, character certificate and certificate of educational qualification.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that all documents were there before respondent authorities except the character certificate that was applied for by the petitioner on 30.11.2021 but was first issued to the petitioner on 05.01.2022. Therefore, the same could not have been on record on 30.12.2021 when the petitioner's application for grant of compassionate appointment came to be rejected.

¶9

On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel would submit, besides the character certificate, the petitioner did not produce the bank passbook and the certificate of educational qualification. Therefore, the impugned order does not call for any interference.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, in the first place, no useful purpose may be served in keeping the present writ petition pending or calling for a counter affidavit as the facts are not dispute.

¶11

Accordingly, the matter has been proceeded with the consent of parties.

¶12

It being undisputed that the claim for compassionate appointment made by the petitioner was rejected on account of absence of three documents, it is to be seen whether non-production of documents may be attributed to the petitioner as may disentitle him to any relief. Thus, it is true, the petitioner ought to have produced the bank passbook and the certificate of educational qualification before the SDM, Ghiror within the time granted as those documents were in his knowledge and control.

¶13

At the same time, it cannot be denied, even if the petitioner had produced those documents, he would not have become entitled for compassionate appointment as a fair price shop agent until his character had been duly certified as required by law.

¶14

With respect to character certification, it also not in dispute that the District Magistrate was the competent authority. The petitioner could not have self certified his character. Having made application on 31.11.2021, the petitioner was at the mercy of the District Magistrate for issuance of necessary certificate.

¶15

Since that certificate came to be issued 5 days after the impugned order was passed, it can never be said that the petitioner was at fault in non-production of that certificate.

¶16

The first conclusion that must therefore be reached in the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case are that the fault noted in the impugned order was contributory. Second, since one of the necessary certificate to be issued by the State authorities was issued late, the petitioner could not be non-suited.

¶17

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 30.12.2021 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the respondent no.3 to pass a fresh order after allowing the petitioner 15 days time to remove all deficiencies noted in the impugned order dated 30.12.2021. Subject to such compliance being made, a fresh order may be passed within a period of one month from the date of such compliance being made.

¶18

It is further clarified other proceedings for fresh allotment may be held in abeyance till decision of the petitioner's application or expiry of two months time, whichever is earlier.

¶19

With the aforesaid observation, present writ petition is disposed of .

¶20

Order Date :- 13.5.2022 Abhilash

¶21

Digitally signed by ABHILASH SINGH Date: 2022.05.14 09:53:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gaurav Kumar v. the State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaurav Kumar v. the State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Upendra Nath Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. through Sec.(Ministry of Home) Lkw 4 Others.

Sh. Vinod Kumar and 9 Others Vs Union of India and Another

Baritala Malik Kabristan and Another Vs Jawahar Lal Sarma and 3 Others

Bangur Yadav Vs State of U P and 5 Others

Smt. Jagan Devi Vs State of U P and 14 Others

Gajram Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others