Disposed

Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari , Balarampur v. Shashendra Pratap Singh and Others

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2024SPLA/108/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Special Appeal regarding allegations of concealed prior compassionate appointment. Court examines Government Orders allowing multiple dependents, requests affidavits on state policy, and stays termination pending record verification.

What did the court decide?

Directions to parties to file affidavits and exchange pleadings; case listed for July 2024.

Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari , Balarampur… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 108 of 2024

¶3

Appellant :- Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari , Balarampur Respondent :- Shashendra Pratap Singh And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Rishabh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Surya Kumar,C.S.C.,Girish Chandra Verma,Ran Vijay Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

¶5

1. Heard.

¶6

On 15.5.2024, we have passed the following order:-

¶7

"The allegation in the appeal is that the brother of the opposite party no.1 got appointment on compassionate basis some time after the death of his father which took place on 23.12.1983 and thereafter opposite party no.1, the younger brother also got compassionate appointment on 03.11.1990. Therefore, apparently the appointment had been secured by concealment/ misrepresentation etc. Although it is the case of the opposite party no.1 that the appointment of the elder brother had been cancelled on the ground that such appointments were banned but he continued on the basis of the interim order and there are certain other averments based on certain Government Orders regarding which there was a confusion that more than one dependent could have been appointed. However, we would like to see the appointment letter of the elder brother as also the cancellation of the same, which was the subject matter of a writ petition being Service Single No.2211 of 1988. Let the records of the said petition be placed before us, whether original records if available, or scanned copies thereof if the same has been preserved.

¶8

Put up this case day after tomorrow, i.e., 17.05.2024, as fresh."

¶9

We have seen the scanned copy of Writ Petition No.2211 of 1988 filed by Shri Lokendra Pratap Singh, brother of private respondent, who was appointed on compassionate basis consequent to death of his father who was also the father of the respondent vide order dated 21.2.1987, but subsequently, his appointment was cancelled on 22.2.1988 on the ground that certain officials/ employees/ teachers had secured their transfer to other district i.e district other than in which they were allegedly appointed on the basis of wrong, illegal or fabricated orders and they should be sent back to their original place of posting and their service should not be paid unless and until they join in the original place of posting. Moreover, the said order further goes on to state that any appointment made on the post of Class-IV post of "Anuchar" after 1985, same should be cancelled with immediate effect.

¶10

The scanned copy shall be tagged along with this appeal.

¶11

However, the case of the respondent is that on 08.10.1984, the State

¶12

Government had issued an order for compassionate appointment of dependents. The word used therein being "Ashriton", which was a plural, therefore, in view of the provision of the said Government Order, more than one person were appointed on compassionate basis and this was permissible. It is only on 02.02.1996 that another Government Order was issued to the effect the only one dependent of the family would be appointed, therefore, it is not a case of fraud, misrepresentation or concealment on the part of the respondent, but firstly, this was permissible vide Government Order date 08.10.1984 or at the worst, it was a misreading on the part of the official themselves, therefore, the services of the respondents could not have been terminated on the ground that the appointment had been secured by fraud, fabrication, misrepresentation or concealment.

¶13

However, counsel for the appellant denies this fact. He says that the respondent never disclosed in his application that his elder brother had already been appointed on compassionate basis, therefore, now this turn around by the respondent is impermissible. He is only trying to twist the facts. The concealment of material fact is apparent and no such proof has been given by the respondent to show that he had for securing his appointment on compassionate basis, ever disclosed that his elder brother had already been appointed on compassionate basis.

¶14

Let the appellant file an affidavit explaining the latter aspect of the matter with regard to Government Orders and how they were implemented at the relevant time between 1984 to 1996 in District- Gonda or Balrampur, as the case may be and the State Authorities i.e. opposite party Nos.2 and 3 shall also file their affidavit on the same aspect as to the background of these Government Orders especially the Government Order dated 02.02.1996 and how they were applied through out the State of U.P. during the said period.

¶15

copy of short counter affidavit filed by the respondent has been provided to learned Additional Chief Standing counsel, Shri Nishant Shukla.

¶16

The respondent should also bring on record any document to show that while securing the compassionate appointment, he has disclosed the factum of his elder brother having been given compassionate appointment.

¶17

It is also the case of appellant's counsel that the record available at Gonda, some of the records have been lost or stolen.

¶18

Pleadings be exchanged between the parties before the next date.

¶19

List in the month of July, 2024.

¶20

(Om Prakash Shukla,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 17.5.2024 Gurpreet Singh

¶22

Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari , Balarampur v. Shashendra Pratap Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari , Balarampur v. Shashendra Pratap Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

C/M Rashtriya Inter College Ranapur Haidergarh Thru. Manager Sunil Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education Lko. and 5 Others

Ankit Singh vs Union of India Thru Secy. Ministry of Railway Board , New Delhi and Others

Ram Raj Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Medical and Health U.P. Lko. and Others

District Basic Education Officer , Balrampur and Others vs Vijay Prakash Singh and Others

Anant Ram vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Sugar Cane Lko. and 6 Others

Distt. Basic Shiksha Adhikari , Balrampur and Another vs Deshraj Singh and Others