Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6074 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 286 of 2025 Petitioner :- Chandraveer Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Bhanu Pratap Singh Kachhawah,C.S.C. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition inter-alias with the prayer to direct the Respondent No. 3 to treat the appointment of petitioner as regular appointment from the date of his initial appointment and given all consequential benefit with effect from the date of his appointment in accordance with law. 2. Facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that the father of the petitioner namely Late Tursi Ram while working on the post of Head Master in Junior School Pivari, Block-Marahara, District- Etah died on 27.10.1989. The aforesaid Junior Basic School are run by U.P. Basic Education Board, Prayagraj. Subsequent to the same, the U.P. Basic Education Board Prayagraj has adopted the Dying and Harness Service Rules 1974 as it is. So the provision of Dying and Harness Service Rules 1974 are applicable of the employees of the Basic Education Department, in this regard the U.P. Basic Education Board had issued a letter on 19.06.1987. Vide order dated 23.08.1997 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Etah/ Respondent No. 3, the petitioner was given an appointment on compassionate ground but the same was provided to the petitioner on a fixed pay scale. Subsequently the services of the petitioner was regularized vide order dated 13.10.2009 passed by the same authority. 3. It is argued that the petitioner was appointed under Dying-in- harness Rules but he has not made permanent. He also placed reliance upon the Judgment of this Court passed in the Case of Smt. Pushpa Devi vs. State of U.P. (Writ A No. 12190 of 2005), in which this Court has held that appointment made under Dying-in- Harness Rules is to be treated as a permanent appointment and not a temporary appointment. He placed reliance upon the order dated 24.06.2023 passed by the Respondent No. 3, District Basic Education Officer, Etah in favour of one Smt Munni Devi, copy of which is appended as Annexure-7 to the paper book. It is further argued that though petitioner submitted the representation from time to time before the Respondent No. 3 but till date no decision has been taken, hence the present writ petition. 4. On the other hand, on the basis of the instructions it is argued by Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh Kachhawah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 3 that representations are not available in the department and in case the petitioner will submit a fresh representation before the Respondent No.3, District Basic Education Officer, Etah he will pass appropriate orders in the matter. 5. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of finally permitting the petitioner to submit a fresh representation ventilating all his grievances before the Respondent No. 3, District Basic Education Officer, Etah, District- Etah. If such representation is made within a period of two weeks from today, the Respondent No. 3 will take a decision in the matter most expeditiously and preferably within a period of four weeks thereafter. Order Date :- 15.1.2025 Swati Digitally signed by :- SWATI PATHAK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad