Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 50621 (ALL)

ANCHAL SAXENA v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/54297/2017 · 2025-04-03

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47693 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 54297 of 2017 Petitioner :- Anchal Saxena Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashutosh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Akhilesh Kumar Sharma,C.S.C.,Deo Dayal Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. This is second round of litigation. The petitioner has earlier approached this Court by way of filing Writ A No. 4107 of 2016, which was disposed of by an order dated 01.02.2016 to consider the case of petitioner for compassionate appointment. 2. Sri Akhilesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for B.S.A. at the outset, submits that in aforesaid circumstances, claim of petitioner was considered, however, due to following legal impediment, her claim was rejected since admittedly, husband of petitioner was appointed on 27.02.2015 as untrained teacher who took charge on 03.03.2015 and unfortunately died on 11.05.2015 i.e. he has worked only for a period of about 2 months and 7 days, therefore, he has not even completed training of 6 months, therefore, according to provisions, petitioner was not entitled for compassionate appointment. 3. None appears on behalf of petitioner. 4. I have perused the record with assistance of Sri Akhilesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for B.S.A. The aforesaid fact of period of service is not disputed. The petitioner has no absolute right for compassionate appointment. She can be appointed only in terms of provisions and schemes applicable. 5. The ground mentioned in impugned order are, therefore, legally sustainable. Otherwise also petitioner's husband died on 11.05.2015 i.e. 9 years ago, therefore, object of compassionate appointment i.e. to tide over sudden financial and other crisis is not now available and, therefore, there is no reason to interfere with impugned order, accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed 6. However, petitioner will have liberty to file recall/review application, if so advised within 8 weeks. 7. A copy of this order be sent to petitioner on given address. 8. Registrar (Compliance) to take steps. Order Date :- 4.4.2025 P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad