High Court · 2025

facts of the case are these;

4. The father in law of the petitioner died in harness on

24.09.2017. The petitioner, her husband, mother in law and their two children were dependent on the deceased employee. The petitioner's husband immediately filed an application for appointment on compassionate grounds after the death of his father. While the application was being processed the petitioner's husband died on

08.06.2023. The petitioner thereafter promptly filed an application for appointment on compassionate ground on

25.03.2023.

5. The application of the petitioner for grant of of appointment on compassionate grounds has been rejected on the ground that it is barred by limitation since it was filed five years after the death of the employee. The impugned order refers 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness (Fifth Amendment) Rules, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as 'Dying in Harness Rules, 1999'). The order thereafter concludes that there is no rationale for listing her in the list of dependents of deceased employee who were entitled to appointment on compassionate ground.

6. The provision is extracted hereunder for ease of reference: "Rule 5. Recruitment of a member of the family of the deceased. - (1) In case a Government servant dies in harness after the commencement of these rules and the spouse of the deceased Government servant is not already employed under the Central Government or a State Government or a Corporation owned or controlled by the Central Government or a State Government, one member of his family who is not already employed under the Central Government or a State Government or a Corporation owned or controlled by the Central Government or a State Government shall, on making an application for the purposes, be given a suitable employment in Government service on a post except the post which is within the purview of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission, in a relaxation of the normal recruitment rules, if such person- (i) fulfils the educational qualifications prescribed for the post, (ii) is otherwise qualified for Government service, and (iii) makes the application for employment within five years from the date of the death of the Government servant: Provided that where the State Government is satisfied that the time limit fixed for making the application for employment causes undue hardship in any particular case, it may dispense with or relax the requirement as it may consider necessary for dealing with the case in a just and equitable manner. (2) As far as possible, such an employment should be given in the same department in which the deceased Government servant was employed prior to his death. (3) Every appointment made under sub-rule (1) shall be subject to the condition that the person appointed under sub-rule (1) shall maintain other members of the family of deceased Government servant, who were dependent on the deceased Government servant immediately before his death and are unable to maintain themselves. (4) When the person appointed under sub-rule (1) neglects or refuses to maintain a person to whom he is liable to maintain under sub-rule (3), his service may be terminated in accordance with the Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999, as amended from time to time."

7. Rules 5 which contains the period of limitation is not cast in iron. The rule of limitation as engrafted in the aforesaid provision is not an inflexible one. The rule empowers the competent authority for processing applications which are beyond the period of limitation the application for employment in case undue hardship in any particular case is being faced. Further the Rule 5 also permits the authorities to relax the rule to deal with the cases in just and equitable manner.

8. The sole justification to make compassionate ground appointments is that the dependents of the deceased employee face unforeseen financial destitution after the death of the latter and need urgent succour.

9. The financial destitution and hardship being caused by two successive deaths in the family have been asserted in the writ petition. The aforesaid pleadings have not been traversed or refuted by the respondents. Hence they are accepted as true. Grant of compassionate appointment will enable the family to tide over the said financial crisis. The delay in submitting the application for compassionate ground appointment was due to bonafide reasons as her husband applied for the same in the first instance. Unfortunately during the processing of application the petitioner's husband had died. The delay in processing the application for appointment on compassionate grounds is entirely due to the fault of the respondents. These relevant factors were neglected from consideration while passing the impugned order.

10. The approach of the respondent employer was mechanical and callous. The order is contrary to the intent of proviso of Rule 5 and defeats the whole purpose of compassionate appointment.

11. The impugned order is vitiated for non application of mind to relevant facts and also for non consideration of the proviso to Rule 5.

12. The impugned order dated 02.04.2024 is liable to be quashed and is quashed.

13. The matter is remitted to respondent no. 3, Regional Manager, U.P.S.R.T.C., Moradabad Region, Moradabad for processing the case of the petitioner in light of observations made in this judgment within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

14. The petitioner is liable to give an undertaking that she will maintain other dependents of the deceased. and upon considering after noticing the other legal heirs of the family of the deceased.

15. The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. Order Date :- 24.4.2025 Pravin PRAVIN VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

facts of the case are these;

4. The father in law of the petitioner died in harness on

24.09.2017. The petitioner, her husband, mother in law and their two children were dependent on the deceased employee. The petitioner's husband immediately filed an application for appointment on compassionate grounds after the death of his father. While the application was being processed the petitioner's husband died on

08.06.2023. The petitioner thereafter promptly filed an application for appointment on compassionate ground on

25.03.2023.

5. The application of the petitioner for grant of of appointment on compassionate grounds has been rejected on the ground that it is barred by limitation since it was filed five years after the death of the employee. The impugned order refers 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness (Fifth Amendment) Rules, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as 'Dying in Harness Rules, 1999'). The order thereafter concludes that there is no rationale for listing her in the list of dependents of deceased employee who were entitled to appointment on compassionate ground.

6. The provision is extracted hereunder for ease of reference: "Rule 5. Recruitment of a member of the family of the deceased. - (1) In case a Government servant dies in harness after the commencement of these rules and the spouse of the deceased Government servant is not already employed under the Central Government or a State Government or a Corporation owned or controlled by the Central Government or a State Government, one member of his family who is not already employed under the Central Government or a State Government or a Corporation owned or controlled by the Central Government or a State Government shall, on making an application for the purposes, be given a suitable employment in Government service on a post except the post which is within the purview of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission, in a relaxation of the normal recruitment rules, if such person- (i) fulfils the educational qualifications prescribed for the post, (ii) is otherwise qualified for Government service, and (iii) makes the application for employment within five years from the date of the death of the Government servant: Provided that where the State Government is satisfied that the time limit fixed for making the application for employment causes undue hardship in any particular case, it may dispense with or relax the requirement as it may consider necessary for dealing with the case in a just and equitable manner. (2) As far as possible, such an employment should be given in the same department in which the deceased Government servant was employed prior to his death. (3) Every appointment made under sub-rule (1) shall be subject to the condition that the person appointed under sub-rule (1) shall maintain other members of the family of deceased Government servant, who were dependent on the deceased Government servant immediately before his death and are unable to maintain themselves. (4) When the person appointed under sub-rule (1) neglects or refuses to maintain a person to whom he is liable to maintain under sub-rule (3), his service may be terminated in accordance with the Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999, as amended from time to time."

7. Rules 5 which contains the period of limitation is not cast in iron. The rule of limitation as engrafted in the aforesaid provision is not an inflexible one. The rule empowers the competent authority for processing applications which are beyond the period of limitation the application for employment in case undue hardship in any particular case is being faced. Further the Rule 5 also permits the authorities to relax the rule to deal with the cases in just and equitable manner.

8. The sole justification to make compassionate ground appointments is that the dependents of the deceased employee face unforeseen financial destitution after the death of the latter and need urgent succour.

9. The financial destitution and hardship being caused by two successive deaths in the family have been asserted in the writ petition. The aforesaid pleadings have not been traversed or refuted by the respondents. Hence they are accepted as true. Grant of compassionate appointment will enable the family to tide over the said financial crisis. The delay in submitting the application for compassionate ground appointment was due to bonafide reasons as her husband applied for the same in the first instance. Unfortunately during the processing of application the petitioner's husband had died. The delay in processing the application for appointment on compassionate grounds is entirely due to the fault of the respondents. These relevant factors were neglected from consideration while passing the impugned order.

10. The approach of the respondent employer was mechanical and callous. The order is contrary to the intent of proviso of Rule 5 and defeats the whole purpose of compassionate appointment.

11. The impugned order is vitiated for non application of mind to relevant facts and also for non consideration of the proviso to Rule 5.

12. The impugned order dated 02.04.2024 is liable to be quashed and is quashed.

13. The matter is remitted to respondent no. 3, Regional Manager, U.P.S.R.T.C., Moradabad Region, Moradabad for processing the case of the petitioner in light of observations made in this judgment within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

14. The petitioner is liable to give an undertaking that she will maintain other dependents of the deceased. and upon considering after noticing the other legal heirs of the family of the deceased.

15. The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. Order Date :- 24.4.2025 Pravin PRAVIN VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad