Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 14244 (ALL)

RAKESH KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS

WRIA/16321/2026 · 2026-10-05

Dinesh Pathak

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 16321 of 2026 Court No. - 32 HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs: "(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents Authorities to appoint the petitioner as Messenger on compassionate ground under Dying-in- Harness Rules, 1974 being the dependent of the deceased father, namely Late Ram Kishan, who was Messenger in Indian Overseas Bank, Branch Dhamera, Kirat, Bulandshahr, District-Bulandshahr (Respondent no.3); (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondent no.2 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 10.12.2025 (Annexure-7 to this writ petition), expeditiously within stipulated period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court; (iii) issue any other suitable writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case;" 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's father died in harness on 19.01.2022 while serving as a Class IV employee. Despite repeated representations submitted by the petitioner seeking appointment on compassionate grounds, the competent authority has not decided the aforesaid representations till date. 4. Sri Jainendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 2 and 3, has contended that the grievance of the present Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dhirendra Kumar Agrahari Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Jainendra Kumar Mishra Rakesh Kumar .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) petitioner, regarding non-appointment on compassionate grounds, can be more appropriately redressed by the Chief Manager, Human Resources Management Department (respondent no. 2) and that he has no objection if a direction is issued for expeditious disposal of the fresh representation, to be moved by the present petitioner, within such stipulated period, as may be directed by this Court. 5. In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served by keeping this matter pending. Accordingly, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present writ petition, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, with liberty to the present petitioner to move a fresh representation before the Chief Manager, Human Resources Management Department (respondent no. 2) ventilating his grievances, as raised in this petition, within a period of three weeks from today, along with a certified copy of this order and a self attested copy of the instant writ petition, who, in turn, shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of production of the same, if there is no other legal impediment. 6. With the aforesaid directions and observations, present writ petition stands disposed of. October 6, 2026 vkg WRIA No. 16321 of 2026 2 (Dinesh Pathak,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad