Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111458 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 36139 of 1999 Petitioner :- Smt. Devendri Devi Respondent :- Pradhan Prabandhak The Disan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd.And Ants Counsel for Petitioner :- Ak Malviya,Anil Kumar Dubey,Chandra Bhan Dubey,V.K.S Kushwaha Counsel for Respondent :- A.K. Misra,Mansoor Ahmad,P.M.N. Singh,Ravindra Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Mansoor Ahmad, learned counsel for respondent. 2. The case of petitioner is that husband of petitioner was dismissed from service vide order dated 21.04.1990 and an arbitration proceedings were initiated. However, during the said proceedings, petitioner's husband died on 12.11.1990, therefore, the arbitration proceedings never reached to its logical conclusion and order of dismissal has attained finality. It appears that the petitioner, thereafter, has filed an application for compassionate appointment. However, same was not considered, still she was allowed to work as a daily wager and when she faced threat that her services may be discontinued, she has approached this Court with the following prayers: "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the responent no.1 and 2 to treat the petitioner in service in pursuance of pending arbitration and prosecution against the husband of the petitioner. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to observe the petitioner in service on the vacant post and direct the respondent no.1 to pay equal pay to the petitioner also for equal work by which justice may be done with the petitioner." 3. This Court has passed following interim order on 24.08.1999 :- "Shri P.M.N. Singh, representing the respondent no.1 prays for and is granted one month's time to file counter affidavit. The petitioner will have one week thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit. List on 26th September, 1990. In view of the fact that the petitioner has stated her claim under Dying in Harness Rules, her claim has been rejected by the order dated 23.09.1995 for permanent appointment, while she has been appointed and is working on daily wages since 1996 as stated in para 12 of this writ petition, it is directed that till further orders her services will not be discontinued." 4. The petitioner was aged about 35 years when the writ petition was filed and as rightly pointed out by learned counsel for respondent that she has now already attained age of superannuation to which learned counsel for petitioner has not disputed. As referred above, the petitioner has served on basis of interim order dated 24.08.1999. 5. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner was never appointed regularly or she was granted compassionate appointment, still she has worked for a very substantial period as a daily wager and has attained age of superannuation. She was even not regularised. 6. In the aforesaid circumstances, since petitioner has enjoyed fruits of interim order and her position of appointment remained only as daily wager, therefore, relief sought on basis of her service cannot be granted. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 11.7.2025 A.N. Mishra Digitally signed by :- AMARNATH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad