Uttarakhand High Court
In The Writ Petition Being Wpss No.86 vs Uttarakhand & Others" on 20 July, 2021
Author: Sharad Kumar Sharma
Bench: Sharad Kumar Sharma
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or
sl. No Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
WPSS No.860 of 2021
With
WPSS No.861 of 2021
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
(Via video conferencing).
Mr. Harendra Belwal, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. N.S. Pundir, Deputy Advocate General, for the State of Uttarakhand.
These are the two connected writ petitions, which engages consideration of a common question of law.
In the writ petition being WPSS No.860 of 2021, "Jamuna Devi Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others", the petitioner has contended that the husband of the petitioner, who was appointed with the respondent No.5, on the post of "Beldar/Anurakshak", was later on placed in the work charge establishment. Unfortunately, the husband of the petitioner met with the sad demise on 11.11.2012. Subsequently, the petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds on 20.11.2013, as Beldar, as would be apparent from the seniority list (Annexure 3) to the writ petition, where the petitioner's name figures at S.No.74 of the list. The petitioner has come up in the writ petition with a case that despite of having represented her claim before the respondents on number of occasions for being granted a permanent status, no decision has been taken as such on the same, and in support of her contentions, she places reliance on the judgment which was rendered by this Court in WPSS No.640 of 2021 "Rakesh Singh Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others", passed on 11.06.2021.
As far as the writ petition being WPSS No.861 of 2021, "Rahul Basera Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others" is concerned, the case of the petitioner before this Court is that the late father of the petitioner, who was appointed with the respondents on the post of "Helper" on 01.07.1988, after putting in eight years of continuous service, he was promoted on the post of Truck Driver in the year 1997. Later on, by an order of 09.03.2005, he was placed under a work charge establishment.
Unfortunately during the course of his employment, he met with the sad demise on 04.10.2011, and subsequent thereto, on an application of the petitioner for being appointed on compassionate grounds, the same was considered and later on, the petitioner was granted an appointment on compassionate grounds, by virtue of an order dated 07.12.2011, on the post of cleaner.
The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that the appointments, which are contemplated under the provisions of the Dying in Harness Rules, they are to be made on a regular basis, and they cannot be a temporary appointment on compassionate ground. He further submits that the issue stands covered by the decision which was rendered by this Court in a bunch of writ petitions, in which leading writ petition, is WPSS No.640 of 2021, "Rakesh Singh Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others" on 11.06.2021.
This Court by virtue of the judgment dated 11.06.2021 rendered in WPSS No.640 of 2021, "Rakesh Singh Vs. State of Uttarakhand & others", had disposed of the writ petition of the identically placed employees, as that of the present petitioners directing the respondents to consider their representations for granting them the status of the regular employees.
Since having been appointed on compassionate grounds and the decision has been directed to be taken by the respondents within a period of two months on their respective representations, hence these writ petitions too would stand disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.5, to take a decision on the respective representations of the petitioners, for the purposes of considering their claim for the grant of permanent status in the light of the principles laid down in the judgment dated 11.06.2021.
Subject to the above directions, the writ petitions stand disposed of.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 20.07.2021 NR/