Allahabad HC Upholds Grant Of Compassionate Appointment To Deceased Govt. Employee's Younger Brother Instead Of His Estranged Wife

The Division Bench dismissed the challenge to the Single Bench’s order which had held the younger brother of the deceased government employee (who was working as a Personal Assistant in the Public Works Department) was well suited for the compassionate appointment since he was an unemployed graduate who was living with the family of the late employee and looking after them by his meagre means, while stating that the estranged wife would not be able to look after the family members of her late husband.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh observed, “Learned Single Judge has noticed the fact that the private respondent no.4 being the younger brother of the deceased who had the burden of taking care of the family of the deceased is more suitable for grant of compassionate appointment cannot be faulted in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case.”

Advocate Ram Prasad Verma appeared for the appellant, while CSC Megha Pandey represented the opposite parties.

Both parties had moved an application with the Public Works Department seeking compassionate appointment under the U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servant Dying In Harness Rules, 1974 (1974 Rules).

The Single Bench directed the department to pass an appropriate order providing a suitable appointment under the 1974 Rules to the brother of the deceased treating him to be more suitable in contrast to the wife. The same was challenged by the wife.

The brother argued that the wife had already severed her ties with the deceased husband and his family members, hence upon his death, she could not claim the right of compassionate appointment.

The Division Bench noted that the wife could not dispute the fact that the she and her deceased husband did not enjoy a cordial matrimonial life. “

“It also could not be disputed that the appellant had lodged a criminal proceedings against her husband and his family members and in furtherance thereto by means of order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court…the matter was referred to the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court wherein a settlement agreement was arrived at. It also could not be disputed that the appellant has been staying separately from her husband and with her parents on account of matrimonial discord,” the Court remarked.

The Court also noted that the wife could not dispute that the she had moved applications before the courts indicating that the parties had already agreed to dissolve their marriage and since the settlement agreement had been arrived at and its conditions were fulfilled, she then withdrew her cases.

“This fact also signifies that agreement was duly acted upon and the appellant did not raise any objection that the settlement agreement remained unfulfilled,” the Court remarked.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the appeal.

Cause Title: Rinki Kumari v. State Of U.P. & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC-LKO:64080-DB)

Appearance:

Appellant: Advocates Ram Prasad Verma and Nidhi Singh

Respondents: CSC Megha Pandey; SC V.P. Nag

Click here to read/download the Judgment