High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Smt. Suman Lata v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 9935 of 2004  RD-AH 135 (10 March 2004)
Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari, J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that Sri Raj Kumar Singh (since deceased), husband of the petitioner, was employed as a Constable (CP) in the U.P. Police Service. Disciplinary proceedings under Rule 14 (1) of the U.P. Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (in short the Rules) were initiated against him for committing certain misconduct. Having been found guilty the services of Sri Raj Kumar Singh were terminated by respondent no. 3 vide order dated 18.2.2003 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition). Aggrieved by the order of his termination dated 18.2.2003, Sri Raj Kumar Singh preferred an appeal before respondent no. 2 under Rule 20 of the Rules. However, during the pendency of the appeal Sri Raj Kumar Singh died on 16.4.2003.
The petitioner moved an application dated 5.5.2003 (Annexure 3 to the writ petition) before respondent no. 3 for giving employment to her on compassionate ground under the provisions of the U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974. However, the application of the petitioner dated 5.5.2003 was rejected by respondent no. 3 vide order dated 12.5.2003 (Annexure 4 to the writ petition) inter alia on the ground that late Sri Raj Kumar Singh was terminated from service and has not died in harness. The petitioner thereafter submitted another application dated 18.12.2003 (Annexure 5 to the writ petition) before respondent no. 3 as well as before respondent no. 2 stating inter alia that since the appeal filed by her husband is still pending as such it was not proper to reject her claim application for employment on compassionate ground. This writ petition has been filed to quash the impugned order dated 12.5.2003 (Annexure 4 to the writ petition) rejecting the claim application of the petitioner and to issue a mandamus commanding respondent no. 2 to decide the appeal of her husband.
Admittedly the claim of the petitioner is related to the decision of the appeal and the rejection of her claim for employment on compassionate ground was premature.
Learned Standing Counsel submits that the appeal which is pending before respondent no. 2 may be directed to be decided within a time bound period so that the claim application of the petitioner for her employment on compassionate ground could be reconsidered.
For the reasons stated above, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent no. 2 to decide the appeal filed by late Sri Raj Kumar Singh, husband of the petitioner, by a reasoned/speaking order in accordance with law within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before it by the petitioner. In case the appeal is decided in favour of the appellant late Sri Raj Kumar Singh, the respondents will reconsider the claim of the petitioner for employment on compassionate ground. No order as to costs.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.