Dismissed

Madhuri Kumari Alias Devi v. Minor Irrigation Department

Jharkhand HC15 Oct 2019WPC/2259/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand dismissed a writ petition filed by a widow seeking compassionate appointment and death-cum-retiral dues. The court held the petition premature as the respondent department had directed her to obtain a Succession Certificate, which she failed to do before approaching the court.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to approach the civil court of competent jurisdiction to obtain the Succession Certificate.

Madhuri Kumari Alias Devi Vs Minor… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P. (S) No. 2259 OF 2017

¶4

Madhuri Kumari @ Devi, wife of Late Binod Kumar Singh

¶5

… … Petitioner

¶6

V E R S U S

¶7

The State of Jharkhand

¶8

The Secretary, Department of Minor Irrigation, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, Ranchi.

¶9

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Hazaribagh.

¶10

… ... Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S. N. PATHAK

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr. Jay Prakash Pandey, Advocate. For the State: AC to AAG

¶13

06/15.10.2019 Heard counsel for the parties.

¶14

Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents to appoint her on compassionate ground.

¶15

Case of the petitioner lies in narrow compass. Petitioner’s husband Binod Kumar Singh was working as an Accounts Clerk in the office of Minor Irrigation Division, Hazaribagh and died in harness on 02.08.2016. After his death, vide Memo No. 1529, dated 29.12.2016, petitioner was directed to submit Succession Certificate for providing her death-cum-retiral dues and appointment on compassionate ground. Petitioner made several representations for redressal of her grievance related to compassionate appointment but no action was taken by the authorities. A Committee was also constituted by the concerned authority but grievance of the petitioner has not been redressed. Being aggrieved, petitioner has knocked door of this Court.

¶16

Mr. Jay Prakash Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is widow of deceased employee and in view of Memo No. 13, dated 08.01.2016 and Memo No. 14, dated 01.12.2015 of Government Circular, petitioner comes under the definition of dependent and is fully entitled for appointment on compassionate ground and is entitled for death-cum-retiral dues also. Petitioner is Intermediate pass and is conversant with Tally in Computer course.

AC to learned AAG submits that case of the petitioner was duly considered and thereafter a direction was issued to the petitioner to come with a Succession Certificate in order to settle the dispute as other family members also approached before the respondents for consideration of their cases. Petitioner, instead of following the direction, has approached before this Court. This is a premature case as case of the petitioner has already been considered for compassionate appointment. Petitioner should have approached before the civil court of competent jurisdiction for obtaining Succession Certificate.

¶21

I find substances in arguments advanced by learned counsel appearing for respondents – State. As already argued by counsel for the respondents petitioner was directed to come with Succession Certificate and instead of doing so, she has knocked door of this Court. This is premature case and is liable to be dismissed. However, petitioner is given liberty to approach before the concerned Civil Court of competent jurisdiction in order to obtain Succession Certificate.

¶22

As a sequel of aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands dismissed.

¶23

( Dr. S.N. Pathak, J. )

¶24

Madhuri Kumari Alias Devi v. Minor Irrigation Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhuri Kumari Alias Devi v. Minor Irrigation 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

Lakshman Manjhi Vs Water Resources Department

Sandip Nandy Vs Chairman Cum Managing Director National Projects Construction Corporation Ltd.

Akhilesh Mahto Vs Welfare

Shailesh Roy Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chandra Shekhar Singh Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Philip Manrandi Vs State of Jharkhand