Dismissed

Ranjan Rastogi @ Rajan Rastogi v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC20 Nov 2014CWJC/5894/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a petition challenging the assignment of a Class IV post instead of a Class III post under compassionate grounds, the court held that a higher category appointment requires passing a requisite test. Since the petitioner was declared unsuccessful in the computer knowledge test, her claim for upgradation was correctly rejected.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed as the claim for upgradation was misconceived due to the petitioner's failure in the competency test.

Ranjan Rastogi @ Rajan Rastogi Vs The State Of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5894 of 2014

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Ranjan Rastogi @ Rajan Rastogi, Daughter of Sri Prem Shanker Rastogi, Resident of Village Sahuli, P.O- Sahauli, P.S. - Hussainganj, DistrictSiwan.

¶5

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar.

¶9

The District Magistrate, Siwan

¶10

The District Education Officer, Siwan.

¶11

The Head Master, V.M.E. High School, Siwan.

¶12

.... .... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance:

¶14

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar and

¶15

Mr. Kundan Kumar, Advocates.

¶16

For the Respondents-State: Dr. Anshuman, SC 14 with

¶17

Mr. Kuber Pathak, AC to SC 14.

¶18

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

2 20-11-2014 Heard the parties.

¶21

The matter at issue in the present proceeding is appointment of the writ petitioner on compassionate ground. It is not in dispute that the mother of the petitioner died in harness on 01.06.2002 while she was working as a government teacher. The petitioner applied for appointment on compassionate ground on a Class III post. The claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was considered by the District Compassionate Committee and finally, by order dated 05.05.2005, the petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground on a Class IV post.

¶22

The grievance of the petitioner is that since she is

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2014 (2) dt.20-11-2014

¶24

2/3

¶25

having higher qualification, her claim for compassionate appointment ought to have been considered for a Class III post. The claim of the petitioner for her appointment on a Class III post on compassionate ground was not acceded to by the respondent District Magistrate, Siwan. Therefore, she filed a Writ Petition, vide CWJC No. 853/2008 before this Court, which was finally disposed of, vide order dated 31.08.2010 (Annexure-2), by a Bench of this Court.

¶26

It is also not in dispute that in the light of the observations of this Court, the claim of the petitioner for her upgradation as Class III post was considered by the competent authority. A written test of computer knowledge was conducted at the district level, but she was declared unsuccessful. Thereafter, by order dated 17.10.2013 (Annexure-1), issued by the respondent District Magistrate-cum-Chairman, District Compassionate Committee, Siwan, her claim for upgradation has not been accepted and she has been allowed to remain on Class IV post on compassionate ground.

¶27

Since the petitioner was declared unsuccessful in the written test held by the respondent authority, the petitioner, as a matter of right, cannot claim to be appointed on a Class III post on compassionate ground. In fact, this is not the scheme and object of compassionate appointment. The mother of the petitioner died long ago on 01.06.2002 and the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was allowed on 05.05.2005. Therefore, at this stage, she cannot be permitted to raise an issue that she is having higher qualification and, therefore, she must be appointed on a Class III post. The claim raised on behalf of the petitioner appears to be misconceived and has to be rejected.

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2014 (2) dt.20-11-2014

¶29

3/3

¶30

For the reasons recorded above, the Writ Petition has

¶31

to fail and is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶32

(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

¶33

Dilip/-
U

Ranjan Rastogi @ Rajan Rastogi v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjan Rastogi @ Rajan Rastogi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sharawan Kumar Ram @ Sharwan Ram Vs The State Of Bihar

Pratima Devi @ Paro Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Alok Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Capt. Deepak Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Social Welfare Department and Anr. Vs Gyanti Kumari and Ors.

Amardeo Prasad Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.