Allowed

Santosh Kumar v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC21 Sept 2012CWJC/5407/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge order allowed a writ petition seeking to quash the rejection of a compassionate appointment application. The court held that having another son in service does not bar a dependent son from appointment, distinguishing a prior Division Bench decision.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed, the rejection order is set aside, and the District Compassionate Appointment Committee is directed to reconsider the application.

Santosh Kumar Vs the State of Bihar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5407 of 2011

¶2

====================================================== 1. Santosh Kumar Son Of Late Mritunjay Kumar Village + P.O. Badara, P.S. Noorsarai District Nalanda , At Present Resident , C/O Gita Devi, Hanumangarhi, Sareya Ward No. 11, P.S. And District - Gopalganj .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary Buildingh Construction Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Chief Engineer Buildingh Construction Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 4. The Executive Engineer Buildingh Construction Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 5. The District Magistrate Gopalganj .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Harendra Prasad For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dinbandhu Singh GP9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA VERMA ORAL ORDER 3 21-09-2012 This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 1.9.2010 passed by the District Establishment Committee, Gopalganj, whereby the claim of the petitioner for his appointment on compassionate ground has been rejected.

¶3

The application for appointment under dying in harness rules has been rejected on the ground that at the time of the petitioner’s father who died in harness, one son of the deceased was in government service. The deceased was an employee of State of Bihar and was posted as Treasurer at

¶4

Patna High Court CWJC No.5407 of 2011 (3) dt.21-09-2012

¶5

¶6

Gopalganj Division of Building Constriction Department.

¶7

The appointment in dying in harness is governed by the Government order issued by the State of Bihar from time to time in its executive power under Article-162 of the Constitution of India. No rule under Article-309 proviso-2 has been placed before me, which specifically provides that the benefit of compassionate appointment shall be available to only one dependent of the deceased. Thus, dependent of deceased is to be read alongwith the definition of the family given in the government order. The family is defined containing the wife of deceased, son, unmarried daughter and widow of the son. It is a settled law that the definition of the family has to be considered in the context the word `family’ has been used in the context of dependency not as a whole

¶8

Thus, if at the time of death a son is in employment will not be a ground for rejecting the application of the dependent son who was not in service, and is entitled for appointment in dying in harness rule as he will fall within the meaning of the family being dependent on the deceased.

¶9

Learned State Counsel submitted that the Division Bench in L.P.A. held that if a son is already employed, the claim does not go to the other son. I have perused the judgment

¶10

Patna High Court CWJC No.5407 of 2011 (3) dt.21-09-2012

¶11

¶12

carefully; the rules as explained above have not been taken into account in the said judgment.

¶13

Therefore, the rejection of the application of the petitioner on that ground is contrary to the Government order and is hereby set aside. The writ petition is allowed. The District Compassionate Appointment Committee, Gopalganj, is directed to re-consider the application of the petitioner for appointment under dying in harness rules.

¶14

(Prakash Chandra Verma, J)

¶15

mrl

Santosh Kumar v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudarshan Sahani Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Mithilesh Kumar Singh @ Kumar Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Arabind Kumar Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Rajendra Prasad Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Raghuvansh Prasad Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Suryadeshwar Pandey and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.