Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 20006 of 2010 Petitioner :- Smt. Malti Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Babu Ram Yadav,Ankit Gaur,Siddhartha Khare,Tarun Gaur Counsel for Respondent :- C. S. C.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri J.S. Bundela, the learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
This petition has been preferred seeking the release of service benefits such as G.P.F., gratuity and family pension to the petitioner. A further prayer is made for the respondents being commanded to give compassionate appointment to the son of the petitioner. The issue itself arises in the backdrop of the husband of the petitioner having gone missing post an order of transfer having been made by the respondents on 4 December 1992. Undisputedly, the husband of the petitioner was appointed in 1970 on the post of Labour in the office of the Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, Allahabad. He is thereafter stated to have been transferred from Allahabad to Meerut and gone missing since 1992. A declaratory suit was thereafter instituted by the petitioner which came to be registered as O.S. No. 1102 of 2008. The relief claimed therein was for a declaration being rendered that the husband of the petitioner was an employee with the respondents and that he should be presumed to have died since he had not been heard of in the last more than seven years. In the aforesaid suit a written statement was filed by the respondents in which it was disclosed that the husband of the petitioner had failed to attend to duties and had remained absent for a long period of time. The respondents thereafter are stated to have effected his termination in terms of an order dated 16 August 2000. Although this fact was duly disclosed before the Civil Court, no issue in respect of the order of termination or its validity was framed. The suit was ultimately decreed with the Court holding that the husband of the petitioner was an employee of the respondents and that he should be legally presumed to have died.
From the above narration of the facts it is more than evident that no challenge to the order of termination was raised at any point of time. The order of termination would therefore be deemed to have attained finality. Learned counsel is unable to establish any right in law for the heirs of a terminated employee to claim the reliefs as framed.
Consequently, no cause arises for this Court to issue of the writs as prayed for.
The writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.1.2019 Arun K. Singh (Yashwant Varma, J.)