2026:UHC:4487-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHASH UPADHYAY 4th June, 2026 SPECIAL APPEAL NO. 206 OF 2026 The Bazpur Cooperative Sugar Factory Ltd. and others. ….Appellants. Versus Arjun Singh and another. …Respondents Counsel for the appellants : Sri T.A. Khan, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Vinay Bhatt, learned counsel. Counsel for the respondents : Sri Amar Murti Shukla and Ms. Chitra Joshi, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Mukesh Singh Rawat, learned counsel for respondent No. 1. Sri M.S. Bisht, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. JUDGMENT : (PER: SRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.) 1. There is ten days’ delay in filing the present intra-Court appeal, which is not seriously opposed by the counsel for the respondents. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and the Application seeking condonation of delay (IA No. 1 of 2026) is allowed. 2. The present intra-Court appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 18.04.2026, by which the writ petition, filed by non-appellant No. 1, Arjun Singh (hereinafter referred to as the ‘writ-petitioner’), has been allowed and the appellants have been directed to re-consider the claim of the writ- petitioner for compassionate appointment on merits within six weeks from the date of presentation of certified copy of the order. 3. The facts, in brief, are that the father of the writ- petitioner was an employee of the appellant-Sugar Factory. He 2026:UHC:4487-DB 2 died while in harness on 12.11.2018. The writ-petitioner submitted an application for grant of compassionate appointment on 14.01.2022. The said application was rejected by the appellants by order dated 20.05.2025 on the ground that it was filed beyond a period of three years from the date of death of the employee. 4. The learned Single Judge has noted the limitation provided under the Dying in Harness Rules, 1974, which is five years from the date of death. Thereafter, the learned Single Judge has also considered the policy decision of the appellants dated 15.11.2011, whereby a period of three years was provided for making application for compassionate appointment. It has been observed that the said policy only provides for a time-frame for filing application, but it did not provide for any adverse consequence in case application is not filed within the said period. Consequently, the said provision has been held to be directory and not mandatory. The learned Single Judge has also observed that the purpose of giving compassionate appointment is to provide succor to the family members of a deceased employee and to tide over the financial difficulties, which would fall upon them as a result of death of the employee. Accordingly, it has been observed that since the delay was only of about one and half month, therefore, the stand taken by the Department in denying the compassionate appointment has not been accepted. 5. Sri T.A. Khan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants, contended that at the relevant time, there was a ban 2026:UHC:4487-DB 3 imposed on compassionate appointments in Cooperative Societies and he made submissions in this behalf while making oral arguments before the learned Single Judge, but which have not been considered. 6. Along with the writ petition, the order, by which the alleged ban was imposed, was not filed. However, along with the present intra-Court appeal, a communication by the State dated 12.06.2018, addressed to the Commissioner, Department of Cane Development and Sugar Industry, has been annexed, which inter alia provides for keeping in abeyance the appointments on compassionate basis. As, the matter has only been remitted back to the appellants for re-considering the application of the writ- petitioner for compassionate appointment on merits and the decision is to be taken by the appellants, we find no good ground to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge on basis of new facts and submissions. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. 7. Pending application, if any, also stands dismissed. _____________________ MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J. ___________________ SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J. Dt: 04th June, 2026 Rathour PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR Digitally signed by PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=23699ccc2fd40ad81b6fd13323779d9e3aeb1097d17dbb53d48 1cabd25946eed, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=1F65499E931DF71CDAF92A40CC6179B8E010331BA695 239171F906FD5C45C4E8, cn=PRAVINDRA SINGH RATHOUR Date: 2026.06.05 16:31:06 +05'30'