HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 67 of 2019 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J. 1. This is an appeal by the State challenging the judgment and order dated 22.11.2017 passed in writ petition no. 28079 (S/S) of 2017; Alka Gupta vs. State of U.P. and ors. 2. We have heard learned Standing Counsel for the State appellants and Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the respondents. 3. The writ court has allowed the writ petition of the respondent/ petitioner by the impugned judgment by interpreting the definition of family as contained in the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servant Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974 so as to include a married sister therein on the strength of judicial pronouncements where married or divorced daughters were included in such definition. 4. The contention of learned counsel for the appellants is that writ petition has been allowed on the first day itself without calling for a counter affidavit. The interpretation given has serious consequences and large scale ramifications, therefore, an opportunity should have been given to the State to assist the Court as to the meaning and purport of the Rules as also whether a married or divorced sister, who stands on a very different Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : C.S.C. Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ajay Pratap Singh State Of U.P. Throu. Prin. Secy. Secondary Education Lko. And Ors. .....Appellant(s) Alka Gupta And Another .....Respondent(s) footing vis-a-vis married or divorced daughter, could be included in the definition of family or not. Such an important issue could not have been decided on the first day without calling for a counter affidavit. Upon being confronted, learned counsel for the respondents could not deny the fact that the writ petition was allowed on the first day without calling for a counter affidavit. 5. Considering the fact that the writ petition was allowed on the first day itself without calling for a counter affidavit though interpretation of the Dying-in-Harness Rules was involved, we are of the opinion that this should not have been done. We accordingly set aside the impugned judgment dated 22.11.2017. Consequently, writ petition no. 28079 (S/S) of 2017 shall stand restored and it shall be listed before the appropriate learned Single Judge Bench in December, 2025. In the meantime appellants shall file counter affidavit in the writ petition. 6. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. October 8, 2025 Arnima SPLAD No. 67 of 2019 2 (Rajeev Bharti,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench