HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 20560 of 2023 Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard Mr. Ramanuj Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Hare Ram, learned counsel for the respondent nos.3 and 4, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. The present writ petition has been filed inter-alia for the following reliefs:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 07.11.2023 passed by the respondent no.4. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondent no.4 to appoint the petitioner on the post of Clerk/IVth Class in the basic education department on the compassionate ground, under dying in harness rule, and pay the salary admissible to the post so that petitioner may able to provide bread to his family. (iii) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (iv) Award the cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner." 3. Placing brief facts of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's husband was appointed as an Assistant Teacher at Prathamik Vidyalaya, Chhiriyahar, Block Takha, District Etawah. Accordingly, an appointment letter was issued on 01.09.2016. Unfortunately, he died in harness on 25.07.2018. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted an application on 06.05.2019 requesting consideration of her claim for appointment on compassionate grounds. Information was given by a letter dated 17.05.2019, issued by the District Basic Education Officer, Etawah, stating that no post of Clerk was vacant in their office. However, in Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ramanuj Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Hare Ram Soni .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) case the petitioner was interested in being appointed to a Class-IV post, she may submit her consent accordingly. In view of the aforesaid, the petitioner submitted her consent letter along with a notarized affidavit on 30.06.2019, seeking appointment to a Class-IV post on compassionate grounds. The petitioner, who belongs to the OBC category and is a poor woman, submitted another application on 20.11.2020 requesting reconsideration of her appointment on compassionate ground. However, no action was taken. Subseqeuntly, she approached this Court by filing Writ-A No. 11098 of 2023 (Soni vs. State of U.P. and Others), wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 23.08.2023, directed respondent no.4 to consider and decide the petitioner's application dated 06.05.2019 within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of that order. In compliance with the aforesaid order, the claim was rejected on the ground that the petitioner's husband had obtained the appointment by submitting a forged TET certificate/marksheet. Consequently, an inquiry was conducted under the directions of the Government, which found that the TET certificate to be forged. Therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to claim appointment on compassionate grounds. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been passed without considering the petitioner's financial condition, qualifications, and without proper application of mind. As such, the order is illegal and arbitrary. He further submits that no inquiry was conducted during the lifetime of the petitioner's husband, and therefore, he had no opportunity to prove that the TET certificate submitted at the time of his appointment was not forged. He further submits that there was no complaint against the petitioner's husband during his lifetime. He was neither suspended nor terminated, nor was any inquiry conducted in his presence. Therefore, the impugned order lacks reasoning. He further submits that the rules for granting compassionate appointments to the families of employees who died in harness are meant to help meet the immediate financial needs of the dependents of a government employee. Any delay in considering such claims frustrates the very object and purpose of the Act. 5. Several similarly situated persons, whose appointments were cancelled on the ground that their TET certificates were not genuine, have approached this Court by filing writ petitions. These petitions were allowed on the basis that the orders of cancellation were passed without following proper disciplinary proceedings and without providing the petitioners an opportunity to be heard. The Court further held that such petitioners are allowed to continue in service, as the cancellation was deemed improper. However, it was left open for the authorities to proceed against these WRIA No. 20560 of 2023 2 petitioners in accordance with the law. Therefore, the impugned order is flawed and cannot be upheld in the eyes of law. 6. On the basis of instructions, learned Standing Counsel submits that there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order, as a detailed inquiry was conducted during the lifetime of the petitioner's husband. The inquiry, which was initiated while he was still alive, revealed that the TET certificate was not genuine. Therefore, no further order was required to cancel the appointment of the petitioner's husband, as the appointment letter itself clearly stated that if any of the documents were found to be forged or not genuine upon scrutiny, the appointment would stand automatically cancelled. 7. He further submits that despite the aforesaid facts, and pursuant to the directions issued by this Court to consider the petitioner's case, the TET certificate of the petitioner's husband was re-verified. Upon re-verification, it was again found to be forged. All the proceedings related to this matter were initiated during the lifetime of the petitioner's husband, the details of which have been mentioned in the impugned order. The inquiry was conducted by a three-member committee, which concluded that several persons, including the petitioner's husband, had sought appointment using forged TET certificates. However, the specific punishment order could not be communicated to the petitioner, as her husband had already expired. 8. So far as the submissions regarding similarly situated persons continuing in service are concerned, there is nothing on record to indicate that the outcome of the inquiry conducted against those persons, who had approached this Court by filing writ petitions. The petitions were allowed leaving it open for the respondents to proceed against the petitioners in those cases strictly in accordance with the law. 9. Learned Standing Counsel has also placed a list containing the names of 25 persons, who sought appointment by submitting forged TET certificates. The petitioner's name appearing at Serial No. 9 in the aforementioned list. He also submits that the petitioner is getting pension. 10. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 11. In this case, the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment is based on the appointment of her late husband, which was found to be invalid due to the submission of a forged TET certificate. The inquiry conducted during his lifetime confirmed the forgery, which rendered his appointment void ab initio. The petitioner cannot be granted compassionate appointment on the basis of an appointment that was legally flawed from the outset. WRIA No. 20560 of 2023 3 12. Compassionate appointment is a remedy intended to assist the families of government employees whose appointments are valid and legally binding. Since the appointment of petitioner's late husband was fraudulent, the petitioner's claim has no legs to stand. Therefore, there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. 13. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, along with the evidence placed on record, it is evident that the inquiry conducted during the lifetime of the petitioner's husband found that his TET certificate was forged, and the appointment letter clearly stated that any such forgery would result in the automatic cancellation of the appointment. As such, petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment cannot be granted. 14. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. 15. On 23.08.2025, the following order was passed:- "1. As per office report, dated 15.07.2025, office has tried to search the counter affidavit, as directed by this Court vide order dated 16.12.2024, but could not search out as yet and the office report further states that as per online computer status report there is no counter affidavit filed till date. However, as per Mr. Hare Ram, learned counsel for respondent nos. 3 and 4 counter affidavit has been filed. In such circumstances, Office is directed to trace the counter affidavit again and in case it is not found, a copy of the same shall be provided by learned counsel for respondent nos. 3 and 4, after certifying the same, which shall be placed before this Court on the next date. 2. List this case, peremptorily, on 08.09.2025. " 16. In compliance with the aforesaid order, the counter affidavit could not be traced. However, a true copy of the same has been given by Mr. Hare Ram, learned Standing Counsel, which has been placed on record and duly considered by this Court. September 8, 2025 Jitendra/- WRIA No. 20560 of 2023 4 (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad