Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:84823 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11568 of 2023 Petitioner :- Smt. Neelam Prajapati Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prem Kumar Chaurasia Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Raj Nath Bhakta,Rajeshwar Mishra,Sandeep Kumar Rai,Shashi Prakash Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. This Court has passed following order on 27.07.2023 :- "1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Respondents No. , 2 and 3 as well as Mr. Shashi Prakash Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents No. 4 & 5. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that the mother of the petitioner while working on the post of Assistant Teacher at Primary School Bharauli, District Azamgarh died in harness on 28.03.2020. Petitioner submitted application for compassionate appointment to District Basic Education Officer, Azamgarh and father of the petitioner gave no objection in favour of the petitioner. Wife of the brother of the petitioner also filed an application seeking compassionate appointment. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited attention of this Court towards a First Information Report lodged on 23.11.2022 by Respondent No.6 wherein all family members i.e. father of the petitioner and other persons have been implicated and serious charges of demand of dowry have been levelled against the entire family. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Rule 7 of U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 provides that where there is some dispute amongst the family members in respect of compassionate appointment then due weight shall be given to the opinion of the living spouse. 5. In the case of petitioner her father has given no objection in her favour and therefore, in the given facts and circumstances, only petitioner could have been offered the compassionate appointment. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the District Basic Education Officer, Azamgarh without considering the aforesaid facts has passed an order on 30.06.2023 whereby he has taken decision to offer compassionate appointment to Respondent No.6 6. I have considered submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and I find that once Respondent No. 6 has lodged F.I.R. against the husband of the deceased government servant and she has also implicated all the family members, then hardly there is any possibility that Respondent No.6 when given compassionate appointment will take care of the family members. I also find that the husband of the deceased government servant has given no objection in favour of the petitioner, therefore, there was no occasion for the District Basic Education Officer to offer compassionate appointment to Respondent No. 6. 7. Matter requires consideration. 8. Issue notice to Respondent No.6. Office is directed to provide 'Dasti' notice to counsel for petitioner for service on Respondent No.6. 9. List this matter on 16.08.2023 as fresh. 10. All the respondents may file counter affidavit. 11. Till further order of this Court the operation and enforcement of order dated 30.06.2023 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Azamgarh shall remain stayed. It is further provided that if pursuant to order dated 30.06.2023 Respondent No.6 has been given appointment, she will not be allowed to work on the post offered to her and she will not be paid salary. " 2. Learned counsel for petitioner reiterated arguments noted hereinabove. 3. Learned counsel for respondent submits that said respondent No.6 has the first right for compassionate appointment whereas petitioner is well of and she is stayed with her father, therefore, there is no financial requirement. So far as FIR is concerned, learned counsel for respondent No.6 submits that she has lodged an FIR against petitioner's side as said respondent has no other option since she was thrown out of the house. Learned counsel for respondent No.6 submits that respondent always ready to look after her father-in-law and for that any condition can be put. Learned counsel for respondent on instruction submits that FIR can be withdrawn also. 4. In the aforesaid circumstances, that aforesaid facts i.e. lodging of FIR, financial status etc. were not brought into notice before the concerned respondent who has passed the impugned order, therefore, impugned order is set aside and matter is remitted to pass fresh order, after giving opportunity to both parties, taking note of above said facts also. 5. The interim order shall remain in currency for a period of 8 weeks or till concerned respondent take a decision, in accordance with law, whatever is earlier, subject to final decision. 6. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad