# Rajesh Kumar Misra v. Registrar, Co-operative Societies U.P., Lucknow and others

- **Citation:** (2002) 1 ILRA 195
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2001-06-19
- **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 30035 of 2001
- **Bench:** M. Katju, R.B. Misra
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/rajesh-kumar-misra-v-registrar-co-operative-societies-u-p-lucknow-and-others-39773
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

1All] Rajesh Kumar Misra V. Registrar, Co-operative Societies U.P., Lucknow and others
195
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD JANUARY 07, 2002.

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE M. KATJU, J.
THE HON'BLE R.B. MISRA, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 30035 of 2001

Rajesh Kumar Misra

...Petitioner
Versus
Registrar, Co-operative Societies U.P.,
Lucknow and others
...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh
Sri Wasim Alam

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri Q.H. Siddiqui
Sri B.N. Singh
Sri Rakesh Tiwari
S.C.

Constitution of India - Article 226 -
Compassionate
appointment
-
an
applicant
for
compassionate
appointment does not have any right to
claim a particular appointment. The
Service conditions of the respondent
Bank are governed by the U.P. Cooperative Societies Service Regulations,
1978 according to which no appointment
can be made in the bank without
approval
of
U.P.
co-operative
Institutional Board. Since the Board did
not give approval to the petitioner's
appointment. Obviously the petitioner
had no right to get that appointment.
The adhoc appointment of the petitioner
as Manager (Law) does not give him any
right to the post. (Held in para 5).

An
applicant
for
compassionate
appointment does not have any right to
claim a particular appointment. The post
of
Manger
(Law)
falls
in
class-II
category, hence the petitioner has no
right for appointment to that post under
Dying in Harness Rules.
Case relied on - A.I.R. 1996 SC P. 1961

(Delivered by Hon'ble M.Katju, J.)

1. This Writ petition has been filed
praying for a writ of certiorari to quash
the impugned order dated 19.07.2001
Annexure-9 to the writ petition and letter
dated 19.06.2001 Annexure-10 to the writ
petition.

2. We have heard learned counsel
for the parties.

3. The petitioner's father was
working as Senior Manager in U.P.
Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank and died in
harness on 09.08.1998. The petitioner is a
law
graduate
and
he
applied
for
appointment under the Dying in Harness
Rules vide application dated 09.09.1998
Annexure-1 to the writ petition. By order
date 04.02.1999 the Registrar wrote to the
Managing Director that the petitioner
does
not
possess
the
requisite
qualification
for
appointment,
vide
Annexure-2
to
the
writ
petition.
Thereafter the a petitioner met the
Administrator of the Bank and applied for
appointment to some post lower than
Senior Manager. He also applied for the
appointment
as
Manager
(Law)
on
compassionate
ground
to
the
Administrator. The Administrator then
wrote to the Managing Director to issue
appointment letter of the post of Manager
(Law) vide Annexure 3 to the writ
petition. Consequently the appointment
letter was issued to the petitioner as
Manager (Law) vide Annexure-4 to the
writ petition. A perusal of this letter
shows that the petitioner was appointment
on ad hoc capacity and subject to the
INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002
196
approval
of
the
U.P.
Co-operative
Industrial Service Board. This letter was
amended on 22.03.1999 vide Annexure-5
to the writ petition. The petitioner joined
as
Manager (Law) at Banda vide
Annexure-6 to the writ petition and he has
been working on that post and was
granted increment vide Annexure-7 to the
writ petition. However, by order dated
19.07.2001 and 19.06.2001 Annexure-9
and 10 to the writ petition the petitioner
was reverted to the post of Accountant. It
is alleged that this was done without
giving opportunity of hearing to the
petitioner. Aggrieved this writ petition has
been filed.

4. A counter affidavit has been filed
in which it was stated in the paragraph5
that the appointment of persons dying in
harness can only be considered for group
- 'C' and 'D' post which are outside the
purview of Public Service Commission
vide G.O. dated 30.11.1989 AnnexureC.A.-1 to the counter affidavit. In
paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit it is
stated that the petitioner's appointment
was only temporary and ad hoc and
subject to the approval of the Service
Institutional Board and the Board did not
approve petitioner's appointment even on
ad hoc basis as Manager (Law). True
copy of the letter dated 11.07.2001 of the
Board in this connection is Annexure
C.A.-3 to the counter affidavit. In
paragraph 9 it is stated that the petitioner
was not neither eligible nor qualified for
the post of Manager (Law) which is a
group - 'B' post. In paragraph 11 of the
counter affidavit it is stated that the
petitioner has been appointed as Assistant
Accountant in accordance with the
relevant Rules.

5. In our opinion, the petitioner has
no right to be appointment as Manager
(Law) under the Dying in Harness Rules.
The service conditions of the respondent
bank are governed by the U.P. cooperative Societies Service Regulations,
1975 according to which no appointment
can be made in the bank without approval
of U.P. Co-operative Institutional Board.
Since the Board did not give approval to
the petitioner's appointment, obviously
the petitioner had no right to get the
appointment. The ad hoc appointment of
the petitioner as Manager (Law) does not
give him any right to the post. Moreover
as held by the Supreme court in State of
Bihar Vs. Samsuz Zotia A.I.R. 1996 SC
1961 an applicant for compassionate
appointment does not have any right to
claim a particular appointment. In our
opinion, the post of Manager (Law) falls
in class-II category, Hence the petitioner
has no right for appointment to the post
under Dying in Harness Rules.

6. The petition is dismissed.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 11.01.2002

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE D.S. SINHA, J.
THE HON'BLE LAKSHMI BIHARI, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.33653 of 1996

Smt. Champa Devi and another

 ...Petitioners
Versus
Rent Control and Eviction Officer (1st),
Allahabad and another ...Respondents

Counsel for the petitioners:
Sri R.N. Singh
Sri Anand Kumar Gupta
Sri K.L. Grover