Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Lata vs State Of Rajasthan on 21 July, 2022
Author: Arun Bhansali
Bench: Arun Bhansali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5032/2022
Smt. Lata S/o Late Vishnu, aged about 30 Years, Resident of
Gulab Bag Jalori Gate Eidgah Jodhpur District Jodhpur Rajasthan.
342001. At present residing Bapu Colony Harijan Bast Gua Shala
Ke Pas Barmer District Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan through the Secretary Department of
Local Self Government Government of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. The Director, Department of Local Bodies, Government of
Rajasthan, Jaipur Rajasthan.
3. The Municipal Corporation Jodhpur through its Municipal
Commissioner Jodhpur Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ripudaman Singh.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suniel Purohit.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
Order 21/07/2022 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the rejection of her application seeking compassionate appointment by order dated 03.06.2021 (Annex.5).
It is inter-alia indicated in the petition that petitioner's mother-in-law was working on the post of Sweeper and died on 01.09.2018. After her death, petitioner's husband i.e. Sh. Vishnu applied for compassionate appointment in place of his mother, however, before appointment could be accorded, he died on (Downloaded on 21/07/2022 at 09:11:16 PM) (2 of 4) [CW-5032/2022] 16.12.2019. The petitioner, on account of death of her husband, applied for compassionate appointment with the respondents being the daughter-in-law of deceased Government servant Smt. Madhu, however, her application has been rejected by order impugned while observing that under Rule 2 (c) of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996, the widowed daughter-in-law is not included.
Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that the issue raised in the present petition, is squarely covered by order in the case of Smt. Pinki vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9177/2010 decided on 12.09.2011.
The definition of 'widowed daughter' includes 'widowed daughter-in-law' and therefore, denial by the respondents in this regard is not justified. Further submissions have been made that the order in the case of Smt. Pinki has been upheld by the Division Bench in DBSAW No.1915/2011 decided on 05.01.2012.
Learned counsel for the respondents made submissions that the interpretation put by the learned Single Judge on the definition of dependent by coming to the conclusion that the widowed daughter would include widowed daughter-in-law, is still open to interpretation/determination as the Division Bench, though dismissed the appeal, however, has left the question open to be adjudicated in future. Further submissions have been made that the Division Bench decided the appeal by referring to the family circumstances, though the family circumstances in the present case also may be similar, the legal aspect needs to be decided.
I have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. (Downloaded on 21/07/2022 at 09:11:16 PM)
(3 of 4) [CW-5032/2022] The status of the petitioner is not in dispute, wherein she is the widowed daughter-in-law of deceased Government servant, Smt. Madhu, and is seeking compassionate appointment, as though initially her husband Sh. Vishnu claimed compassionate appointment, however, before the same could be accorded to him, he died.
The Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Pinki (supra) inter-alia came to the following conclusion:
".... The legal position that emerges from the entire discussion is that for the purpose of the Rules of 1996 the term "widowed daughter" includes a "Widowed daughter- in-law", as such, she is a "dependent" as per Rule 2 (c) of the Rules of 1996. This inclusion serves the purpose of the Rules of 1996 and it is in consonance to the objects of the Rules. This inclusion is also not having any effect of amendment in the Rules. On the other hand, non-inclusion of "widowed daughter-in-law" in the ambit of dependents is having adverse effect on the purpose and objects of the statute concerned, as happening in present set of facts."
The Division Bench, in appeal arising out of judgment in the case of Smt. Pinki (supra), while deciding the appeal observed as infra:
"Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of record of the case, we are not inclined to interfere in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
Without going into the legal niceties and strict interpretation of law which we consider it improper to examine in the facts of the case, we are rather obliged to feel that substantial justice would be done, if the State Government implements the writ issued by the Writ court by giving the respondent appointment in the State Government services.
It cannot be disputed that now there is no one in the family of Mohan Lal to look after the surviving members except respondent i.e. daughter-in-law because the elder male members of family died in a road accident, leaving alone the respondent with her two minor daughters and two old ladies. In such circumstances, the respondent is given appointment, then she would be able to take care of surviving members of family out of her earning. In our opinion, therefore, it is a fit case in which State instead of filing an appeal should have complied with the Writ issued by the Single Judge and given appointment to the (Downloaded on 21/07/2022 at 09:11:16 PM) (4 of 4) [CW-5032/2022] respondent. The financial hardship occurred to the surviving family members in this case is writ large and therefore, the State must act as an honest person and provide some solace to the survivors of the family.
We hasten to add that we have not been swayed away only by the emotional aspect of the matter, at the same time, we feel that we would examine the legal issue in appropriate cases as and when occasion arises in future.
Since learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the appellant (State) too has also agreed to this suggestion, we do not wish to embark upon the examination of the legal issues arising in the case.
To conclude, we do no consider it appropriate to interfere in the writ issued by the learned Single Judge and keeping the legal issue open for its examination in appropriate case in future, decline to interfere and dismiss the appeal.
Let the order of learned Single Judge be implemented within three months from the date of our order by the State."
In view of the fact that the Division Bench, though keeping the legal issue open has dismissed the appeal arising out of the judgment of the learned Single Judge, insofar as this Court is concerned, it needs to follow the judgment of the Coordinate Bench and in case the respondents seek any remedy, it can seek the same in view of observations made by the Division Bench from the appropriate forum.
In view of above discussion, the petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The order impugned dated 03.06.2021 (Annex.5) is quashed and set aside and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for granting compassionate appointment ignoring the fact that she is widowed daughter-in-law of deceased Government servant Smt. Madhu. Needful may be done by the competent authority within a period of four weeks.
(ARUN BHANSALI),J 140-DJ/-
(Downloaded on 21/07/2022 at 09:11:16 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)