High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88469 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 63300 of 2011 Petitioner :- Shri Prakash Khare Respondent :- The State Of U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dharmendra Vaish,Gopal Khare,R. Vaish Counsel for Respondent :- Dhananjay Pratap Singh,Jitendra Kumar,Sanjay Kumar Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard Sri Gopal Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Raj laxmi Singh, learned Standing Counsel for State- respondents. 2. The petitioner is guilty of his own act, that he is out of service which he got on compassionate grounds for last more than 16 years. 3. The petitioner was appointed as Clerk on compassionate ground on 16.08.1995 that he was an adopted son of Late Smt. Rama Devi Khare, a teacher died in harness and that an adoption deed was registered also. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has served for more than 15 years when an inquiry was initiated on basis of complaint made by some stranger that he was not an adopted son of Late Smt. Rama Devi Khare. At this stage, a notice was issued by District Basic Education Officer, Lalitpur and a three member committee was appointed and four notices were issued to petitioner to submit his explanation alongwith the documents on 23.05.2011, 06.06.2011, 05.07.2011 and 20.07.2011. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has submitted his reply dated 14.07.2011 to the notice dated 05.07.2011. However, instead of submitting document as demanded i.e. a copy of the adoption deed he made vague reply and for reference contents of it are reproduced hereinafter. " सनदरररत पत रदनननक 05.07.2011 जज ममझझ रदनननक 11.07.2011 कज पनप करनयन गयन हह। इसकझ पपरर आपकझ पत मम उरलखखत कजई पत ममझझ पनप नहह करनयझ गयझ हह। उपरजक पत मम अनरकत सरभ पतत कक पमनरणत परतयनन उपलबध करननझ कक कक पन करझ। खजलनखधकनरभ महजदय कझ आदझश रदनननक 17.05.2011 तथन आपकझ पतनक/ मझमज/ रदनननक 23.05.2011 कक परतयत ममझझ शभघ उपलबध करनयभ जनयम। अनमकमपन रनयमरक जजच कझ समबगध मम पत रनयमरककतनर अखधकनरभ दनरन। ममझझ कजई सपचनन नहह दभ गई हह। उनकझ दनरन इस आशय कन ममझझ सनदरशरत यन पषननरकत पत रनगरत रकयन गयन हज तज उसकक परत ममझझ उपलबध करननझ कक कक पन करम। उपरजक समसत पतत कक परतयनन पनप हजनझ पर मह अपनन ररसतकत सपषभकरण पसतमत कर सकप क गन। सनदरररत पत मम रदनननक 14.07.2011 कज शभमनन कझ समक सरयन उपससथत हजकर रनयमरक समबनधभ सगसत अररलझख उपलबध करननझ कन आदझश रदयन गयन हह। इस समबनध मम यह अरगत करननन समभचभन हजगन रक पतयझक कमरचनरभ कक रनयमरक समबनधभ पतनरलभ कनयनरलय मम सनधनररत हजतभ हह खजसमम रनयमरक सझ समबसनधत समसत मपल अररलझख यजखजत हजतझ हह। उक पतनरलभ कझ अरलजकन सझ आपकक आशनकन कन रनमप रलन हज जनरझगन। इन मपल अररलझखत कक पमनरणत परतयत कक मजग मझरझ दनरन रदनननक 06.01.2011 कज खजलन बझखसक रशकन अखधकनरभ लखलतपमर सझ कक गयभ हह ( आरझदन पत कक छनयनपरत सनलग हह।) सहनयक बझखसक रशकन अखधकनरभ जखखरन दनरन रभ उक पमनरणत परतयनन ममझझ उपलबध करननझ हझतम खजलन बझखसक रशकन अखधकनरभ लखलतपमर सझ पतननक/2340-41/2010-11 रदनननक 31.01.2011 दनरन अनमरजध रकयन गयन हह। समलर सननदरर हझतम पत कक छनयनपरत सनलग हह। खजलन बझखसक रशकन अखधकनरभ महजदय सझ आज रतखथ तक मपल पतत कक पमनरणत परतयनक ममझझ पनप नहह हहयभ हह परतयनन पनप हजतझ हभ आपकझ पनस पसतमत कर दप कगन। आज रदनननक 14.07.2011 उपरजक जरनब पसतमत कर रहन हह क।" कज मह शभ पकनश खरझ सरयन आपकझ समक उपससथत हजकर 6. In the aforesaid circumstances, impugned order dated 13.10.2011 was passed on the ground that petitioner was failed to submit any prove that he was adopted by Late Smt. Rama Khare i.e. a copy of registered adoption deed and in absence of such document, obvious decision was to terminate him from service. Since in absence of such document he would not fall within the definition of 'family' for the purpose of compassionate appointment under the Dying in Harness Rules, 1974. The aforesaid order is impugned in this writ petition, pending for last more than 14 years. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers following documents annexed alongwith the supplementary affidavit filed on 19.08.2024 i.e. after 13 years of filing this writ petition. A. An FIR was lodged against the petitioner for committing forgery while applying for compassionate appointment, however, after investigation a final report was submitted and vide order dated 25.01.2024 passed by learned Magistrate it was accepted. B. A photocopy of the adoption deed as well as photocopy of details of its registration. C. A photocopy of an order passed by the Registrar, whereby, cost was imposed and a direction was passed to deposit it and a photocopy of receipt of deposit of cost. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that aforesaid documents were not placed when the impugned order was passed. 9. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that in absence of aforesaid documents and that the petitioner was failed to submit any document in support of his claim that he was an adopted son, the impugned order was passed, which may not be interfered as well as subsequent documents placed before this Court may not be taken note of. 10. Heard, learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.As referred in the initial part of this order, the petitioner is himself guilty of facing order of termination. The documents which were required to be submitted way back in the year 2011 before the three members committee, not only they were submitted but now said documents were not placed alongwith writ petition and now after more than 13 years they are placed on record probably due to good advice of subsequent advocate. 11. In the aforesaid circumstances, the Court is of the opinion that now the petitioner has sufficient documents that he was an adopted son of Late Smt. Rama Devi Khare as well as none else in the family has come forward either before the concerned respondent or before this Court to make any objection, therefore, impugned order can be set aside. 12. Therefore, impugned order is set aside and the petitioner is granted liberty to produce documents in order to prove that he was adopted by deceased employee before concerned respondent, who will pass a fresh order. It is made clear that in case petitioner's appointment found genuine, the period between 13.10.2011 and date of fresh order shall be considered as 'no work no pay' though, he may be treated to be continue in service.
Decision
13. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 Imtiyaz Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad