Dismissed

Aaisha Bibi v. Home Department

Jharkhand HC15 Sept 2017WPC/3536/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking compassionate appointment and compensation. The court held that the petitioner approached with an unclean hand by suppressing her husband's criminal antecedents and that she could not claim benefits under a government notification requiring no criminal record.

What did the court decide?

The prayer for compassionate appointment and compensation of Rs. 20 lakhs is dismissed.

Aaisha Bibi Vs Home Department — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 3536 of 2016

¶2

Aaisha Bibi, W/o- Late Muslim Ansari, resident of village+POChando, PS-Chainpur, District-Palamau, Jharkhand

¶3

... ... Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary Home Department at Project Bhawan, PO&PS-Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand

¶6

Deputy Commissioner, Palamau at Medninagar (Daltonganj), PO&PS-Daltonganj, District-Palamau, Jharkhand

¶7

Superintendent of Police Palamau at Daltonganj, PO&PSDaltonganj, District-Palamau, Jharkhand

¶8

Circle Officer, Chainpur, PO&PS-Chainpur, District-Palamau, Jharkhand ... ... Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

¶10

For the Petitioner : Mr. Md. Faruque Ansari, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, J.C. to G.P. V

¶11

12/15.09.2017 Prayer in the writ petition is for compassionate appointment and compensation of Rs. 20 lakhs to the petitioner.

¶12

Claim of the petitioner is founded on a plea that in terms of Government Notification dated 07.05.2003 dependent of a person killed in extremist violence shall be offered compassionate appointment. Death of the husband of the petitioner occurred on 23.10.2009 in connection to which Chainpur P.S. Case No. 188 of 2009 was registered on 24.10.2009. It was alleged that the MCC extremist kidnapped the husband of the petitioner and killed him.

¶13

Opposing the prayer in the writ petition, in the counter-affidavit the respondents have pleaded that one of the conditions for grant of benefit under the Government Notification dated 07.05.2003 is that deceased had no criminal antecedent. On an enquiry on criminal antecedent of the deceased, however, it has been found that he was an accused in Chainpur P.S. Case No. 59 of 2002, registered for offences under Section 147/148/149/341/342/323/307/427/504 IPC.

¶14

-2-

¶15

In this proceeding invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has approached this Court with unclean hand. She has suppressed a vital information regarding criminal antecedent of her husband which shall have a bearing on the outcome of this writ petition. Once it is asserted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that husband of the petitioner has faced trial in Chainpur P.S. Case No. 59 of 2002, in law it must be presumed that the petitioner had knowledge of the said case registered against her husband. Accordingly, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed for this reason. On merits also, in view of a specific stipulation in Government Resolution dated 07.05.2003 in respect of the criminal antecedent, the petitioner cannot claim benefits flowing from the said Resolution.

¶16

Finding no merit in the writ petition, it is dismissed.

¶17

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)

¶18

Tanuj/-

Aaisha Bibi v. Home Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aaisha Bibi v. Home Department

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

Similar cases

Sanjay Prasad Vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Lakhpati Devi And Ors. Vs Social Welfare Women And Child Development Dept

Vijay Kumar Vs The Central Coalfield Limited Through Its Chief Manager M P And Rectt And Ors.

Bhikhari Prasad Mahato Vs Union Of India Ministry Of Railways And Ors.

Hira Ganjhu Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Tarsem Singh Vs The State Of Jharkhand