Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8932 (ALL)

AMRITA SRIVASTAVA v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/1076/2025 · 2025-02-17

Prakash Padia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:23000 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1076 of 2025 Petitioner :- Amrita Srivastava Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pavan Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rajesh Khare Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayers :- "1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing/commanding to the respondent No. 3 to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner as such his unmarried brother namely Alakh Rai Srivastava was dying in harness during his service on the post of Assistant Teacher in the Basic School of the respondent No. 4 so that justice may be done. 2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing/commanding to the respondent No. 3 to take decision over the application of the petitioner dated 07.12.2024 as well as 09.12.2024 within a stipulated period as fixed by this Hon'ble Court so that justice may be done." 2. Sri Rajesh Khare, learned counsel for the respondent no.3 placed before this Court the instructions received from the office of District Basic Education Officer, Banda, same is taken on record. 3. It is stated in the aforesaid instructions that the application/information dated 08.01.2025 has been given to the petitioner to submit online application. 4. It is argued by counsel for the petitioner that aforesaid letter has been received by the petitioner and now she will make online application seeking her appointment on compassionate ground. Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon paragraphs 27, 28 & 29 in the case of Vimla Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in 2016 (1) ADJ 21. The paragraphs 27, 28 & 29 reads as follows :- "27. In conclusion, we hold that the exclusion of married daughters from the ambit of the expression "family" in Rule 2 (c) of the Dying-in-Harness Rules is illegal and unconstitutional, being violative of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution. 28. We, accordingly, strike down the word 'unmarried' in Rule 2 (c) (iii) of the Dying-in-Harness Rules. 29. In consequence, we direct that the claim of the petitioners for compassionate appointment shall be reconsidered. We clarify that the competent authority would be at liberty to consider the claim for compassionate appointment on the basis of all the relevant facts and circumstances and the petitioners shall not be excluded from consideration only on the ground of their marital status." 5. In this view of the matter, in case such an application is filed within three weeks from today, the respondent no.3-District Basic Education Officer, Banda is directed to consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law without influence by the order passed today in this writ petition. Order Date :- 18.2.2025 Pramod Tripathi Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad