Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50660 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 54414 of 2013 Petitioner :- Basanti Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P.And 3 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Kumar Nagvanshi,Girijesh Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- Sunil Kumar Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri Girijesh Tiwari, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Shashi Prakash Singh, learned A.C.S.C. for State. 2. This writ petition is pending since 2013. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner, husband of petitioner died-in- harness on 06.07.1992 and immediately thereafter she was appointed on compassionate ground on basis of proposal dated 14.02.1993 and matter was referred to B.S.A. concerned for granting approval. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that concerned B.S.A. by a communication dated 31.05.1993 directed to Deputy Inspector of Schools to make the necessary inquiry and to submit a report, however, no report was immediately submitted and accordingly, petitioner has no other option to approach this Court by way of filing Writ petition No. 1835 of 2013. The said writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 16.04.2013 to examine the claim of petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that contesting respondent has not decided issue immediately and when a contempt proceeding was initiated, the impugned order dated 10.06.2013 was passed. 6. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that aforesaid documents i.e. proposal of committee, appointment, appointment letter as well as a communication of B.S.A. concerned was not considered and claim of petitioner was rejected that she has for the first time filed application for compassionate appointment in the year 2002 i.e. after more than 10 years, however, basis of such conclusion was not on record. 7. In the aforesaid circumstances, petitioner has approached this Court against the said impugned order dated 16.06.2013. 8. Learned counsel for petitioner refers relevant paragraphs of this writ petition and submits that despite this writ petition is pending for last more than 10 years and despite opportunity, no counter affidavit is being filed by contesting respondent as such the averments made in this writ petition remained uncontroverted. 9. Per contra, learned A.C.S.C. for State submits that though no counter affidavit has been filed but at belated stage i.e. after more than 3 decades, in absence of object of compassionate appointment, claim of petitioner cannot be considered. 10. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner on basis of oral instruction submits that petitioner is still working on basis of her appointment at concerned school, however, since no approval was granted, she has not been paid salary. 11. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner refers paragraph No.28 and 29 in order to submit that petitioner is still working in institution and petitioner was working when this writ petition was filed. For reference the said paragraphs are mentioned hereinafter :- "28. That the petitioner is continuously performing and discharging her duties since her initial appointment in the institution i.e. since 14.02.1993 uptill now without any break and due to the arbitrary action of the respondent authorities, she is being harassed and victimized and same is the violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 29. That on account of the sudden death of her husband, who was the sole bread earner of the entire family, the petitioner is facing financial crunch and great hardship and it became impossible for the family to make both ends meet and the petitioner had no immovable property and there is nobody to support the family and the petitioner consists of her son and her two daughters and due to the arbitrary and inaction on the part of the respondent authorities, the petitioner and her entire family are being harassed and as such the impugned order is liable to be interfered by this Hon'ble Court." 12. I have considered the above submission and perused the record. The law in regard to compassionate appointment has been reiterated by Supreme Court recently in Tinku Vs. State of Haryana and Others, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3292. 13. The Court takes note that despite there may be a legal impediment so far as compassionate appointment is concerned, if the above referred document are genuine such as proposal and appointment letter as well as communication made by B.S.A. and since contents of paragraph 28 are remained uncontroverted as no counter is filed, the claim of petitioner can be considered. 14. The Court also takes note that in support of contents of above referred paragraph No.28, no recent document is placed on record, therefore, it is directed that concerned respondent will revisit the impugned order as it has passed on foreign material without considering the documents annexed with this writ petiton and in case of scrutiny, the above documents are found genuine and petitioner is still working since her appointment, the case of approval will be considered in accordance with law. The aforesaid exercise shall be concluded within 6 months. 15. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation. Order Date :- 8.4.2025 P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad