Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for State-respondents.
By means of the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for being appointed on compassionate ground under the provisions of U.P. Recruitment of Dependent of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as '1974 Rules') Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the husband of the petitioner was working as Safai Karmchari when he died in harness on 08.04.2019. The petitioner professes herself to be the wife of the deceased employee and thereafter claimed for being appointed on compassionate ground through her application dated 03.05.2019.
This Court vide order dated 27.09.2019 had required learned counsel for the petitioner to bring on record the appointment order of the petitioner's husband and had also required learned Standing Counsel to seek instructions as to whether the post of Safai Karmchari on which the husband of the petitioner was working was regular or not.
Today Sri Vinod Shukla, learned Standing Counsel, on the basis of instructions submits that the petitioner's husband Sri Nand Lal was working as regular Safai Karmchari. Sri Shukla also contends that unmarried daughter of the deceased employee has staked her claim for being appointed on compassionate ground under the provisions of 1974 Rules. The petitioner is the second wife of the employee having contacted marriage after the death of the first wife. It is contended that the Head of the Office namely District Panchayat Raj Officer, Lakhimpur Kheri, had issued a letter dated 24.10.2019 to both, the petitioner and unmarried daughter of the deceased employee to set forth their claim before the Head of the Office in terms of Rule 7 of 1974 Rules. Despite the date of 02.11.2019 having been fixed the petitioner failed to turn up. Sri Shukla also contends that taking into consideration Rule 7 of 1974 Rules where if more than one member of the family of the deceased Government servant seeks employment under 1974 rules, the Head of Office shall decide about the suitability of the person for giving employment. It is contended that the Head of the Office is strictly adhering Rule 7 of 1974 rules and accordingly letters had been issued.
Having heard learned counsel for the contesting parties and considering the instructions as have been made available to Sri Vinod Shukla, learned Standing Counsel, under the signatures of the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Lakhimpur Kheri, it is found that the Head of the Office is already seized of the matter in terms of Rule 7 of 1974 Rules for considering the claim of the family members of the deceased Government employee staking their claim for compassionate appointment. In this view of the matter, it is left open to the petitioner to approach the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Lakhimpur Kheri, on a date to be fixed by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Lakhimpur Kheri i.e. respondent no.2 for considering the rival claims of the petitioner as well as unmarried daughter of the deceased employee for which a letter shall be issued by respondent no.2 to the petitioner as well as unmarried daughter of the deceased employee within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order calling upon them to appear in his office so that their claims may be adjudicated in terms of Rule 7 of 1974 rules.
With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.11.2019 A. Katiyar