# The C/M, R.B.I. College & another v. The Jt. Director of Education and others

- **Citation:** (2001) 1 ILRA 308
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 1999-03-28
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/the-c-m-r-b-i-college-another-v-the-jt-director-of-education-and-others-39610
- **Pages:** 3

## Text

INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2001
308
6. For the reasons aforesaid, this
writ
petition
fails
and
accordingly
dismissed.

25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,'(
&,9,/ 6,'(
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21·%/( 90 6$+$, -
7+( +21·%/( 90 6$+$, -.

&LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI

7KH &RPPLWWHH RI 0DQDJHPHQW 5% 5DR
,QWHU &ROOHJH RWKHUV
«3HWLWLRQHU
9HUVXV
7KH -RLQW 'LUHFWRU RI (GXFDWLRQ 9,,WK
5HJLRQ 2WKHUV
«5HVSRQGHQWV

&RXQVHO IRU WKH 3HWLWLRQHU
6KUL $% 6LQJK
&RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQWV
6&

83 ,QWHUPHGLDWH (GXFDWLRQ $FW
5HJXODWLRQ

&RPSDVVLRQDWH
$SSRLQWPHQW ± +XVEDQG GLHG LQ KDUQHVV
'LVWULFW
&RPPLWWHH
FRQVWLWXWHG
XQGHU
QRWLILFDWLRQ GDWHG DFFHSWHG WKH
FODLP
±
',26
E\
RUGHU
GDWHG

GLUHFWHG
0DQDJHPHQW3ULQFLSDO
WR
LVVXH
DSSRLQWPHQW OHWWHU ± LQVWHDG RI WKDW
PDQDJHPHQW
ILOHG
ZULW
SHWLWLRQ
±
GLUHFWLRQ
LVVXHG
WR
LVVXH
WKH
DSSRLQWPHQW OHWWHU
+HOG ± 3DUD
7KH
FODLP
WKDW
WKH\
ZRXOG
RIIHU
DSSRLQWPHQW WR KHU PLQRU VRQ ZKHQ KH
EHFRPHV PDMRU LV DOVR DGYDQFHG WR GHQ\
DSSRLQWPHQW WR WKH ZLGRZ 7KH IDPLO\ RI
WKH GHFHDVHG DSSHDUV WR EH LQ ILQDQFLDO
FULVLV 7KH ZLGRZ LV UXQQLQJ IURP SLOODU
WR
SRVW
EXW
WKH
SHWLWLRQHUV
DUH
QRW
FRPSO\LQJ ZLWK WKH RUGHU RI ',26 QRU
WKH\ DUH SHUPLWWLQJ WKH ZLGRZ WR MRLQ
7KH RUGHU ZDV SDVVHG E\ ',26 RQ WKH
EDVLV RI SXEOLF SROLF\ ,W VHUYHV SXEOLF
LQWHUHVW LQ DEVHQFH RI DQ\ YDOLG UHDVRQ
WKH SHWLWLRQHU FDQQRW GHQ\ DSSRLQWPHQW
WR WKH ZLGRZ

By the Court

1. Dhrup Deo Dubey was working
as Chaukidar on a class-IV post in Ram
Bilas Rao, Intermediate College, Rampur
Buzurg, Salempur, Deoria. He died in
harness on 28.3.1999, leaving behind
Smt. Subhawati Devi his widow, a minor
son and a minor daughter. The widow
claimed appointment under the dying in
harness rules. On 25.1.2000 the District
Inspector of Schools, Deoria (in brief
DIOS)
called
for
report
from
the
manager/Principal.
The
district
Committee constituted under notification
dated 2.2.1995 considered the petitioner's
claim and found the widow entitled for
appointment under the dying in harness
rules. The DIOS on 2.8.2000 directed the
Manager/Principal
to
appoint
Smt.
Subhawati Devi. The petitioners made a
representation on 15.9.2000 to DIOS that
order dated 23.8.2000 be cancelled. The
manager alleged that Smt. Subhawati
Devi is aged 60 years. He raised dispute
about date of birth of the widow. And
stated that son of the deceased who is a
minor be given appointment after he
becomes major. It appears that at the
instance of the petitioners that Principal
did not issue appointment letter to the
widow. The widow informed the DIOS
that neither she has been appointed nor
permitted to join the institution. The
DIOS on 16.10.2000 wrote a letter to the
Manager/Principal that they were not
complying
with
the
order
dated
23.8.2000. And in case the order is not
complied legal action would be taken.
Instead of complying with the orders of
DIOS the petitioner have filed this
1All] The C/M, R.B.I. College & another V. The Jt. Director of Education and others
309
petition challenging the order of
DIOS dated 23.8.2000.

2. Sri A.B. Singh the learned
counsel for the petitioners has urged that
Smt. Subhawati Devi is aged sixty years
and she could not be appointed under the
dying in harness rules. He further urged
that the date of birth of the widow is
disputed as to whether it is 18.4.1968 of
18.4.1958.
The
representation
dated
15.9.2000 in this regard made by Manager
is pending before the DIOS but without
deciding it the DIOS could not direct for
compliance of his order. He lastly urged
that the management is ready to appoint
minor son of the deceased after he
becomes
major,
therefore,
the
appointment of the widow deserves to be
set aside. On the other hand Sri S.P.
Pandey the learned standing counsel
appearing for respondents no.1 and 2
supported the orders of DIOS.

3. Appointments on compassionate
grounds under the Dying in Harness Rules
is made as an exception to the general
rules of recruitment. The object of
compassionate appointment is to enable
the family of the deceased to tide over the
sudden crisis, and grant immediate relief
to the family in penury, which is facing
undue hardship due to the death of sole
earner of the family. Dhrup Deo Dubey
died on 28.3.1999 leaving behind his
widow, minor son and minor daughter.
The family did not have any source of
livelihood nor was able to make both ends
meet. This is clear, as the widow is
illiterate and children are minor. On her
claim for appointment under the Dying in
Harness Rules the District Committee
constituted under Regulation 105 of the
Regulations
framed
under
U.P.
Intermediate
Education
Act
1921,
recommended for appointing her on a
class-IV post. The DIOS on 23.8.2000
directed the appointing authority to
appoint respondent no. 3, the widow. The
petitioners are opposing her appointment.
The objection that the widow is aged 60
years does not appear to be correct. No
evidence or material was filed along with
the representation. Photostat copies of
family register have been filed in this
court. The entries are conflicting. In one
date of birth is 18.4.1958 whereas in the
other it is 18.4.1968. This is a disputed
question of fact. It cannot be decided by
this court. The petitioners did not appear
to have raised it before the DIOS. The
circumstances
do
not
support
the
petitioners. Dhrup Deo Sharma died in
1999. He was not aged sixty years.
Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that
his wife was not aged sixty years in 2000.
The petitioners for the reasons best known
to them are opposing her appointment.
The
claim
that
they
would
offer
appointment to her minor son when he
becomes major is also advanced to deny
appointment to the widow. The family of
the deceased appears to be in financial
crisis. The widow is running from pillar to
post but the petitioners are not complying
with the order of DIOS nor they are
permitting the widow to join. The order
was passed by the DIOS on the basis of
public policy. It serves public interest. In
absence of any valid reason the petitioner
cannot deny appointment to the widow.

4. The writ petition is devoid of any
merit. It is accordingly dismissed. The
petitioners and principal of Ram Bilas
Rao
Intermediate
College,
Rampur
Buzurg, Salempur, District Deoria are
directed to appoint Smt. Subhawati Devi
the respondent no. 3 on a class-IV post
INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2001
310
and permit her to join as directed by the
District Inspector of Schools.

25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,'(
&,9,/ 6,'(
'$7( $
'$7( $//$+$%$'
//$+$%$'
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21
%/( $. <2* -
7+( +21
%/( $. <2* -

&LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI

6KUL 5DP %ULNVKD &KDXGKDUL «3HWLWLRQHU
9HUVXV
3ULQFLSDO 0DKDUDQL /D[PL %DL 0HGLFDO
&ROOHJH -KDQVL DQRWKHU 5HVSRQGHQWV

&RXQVHO IRU WKH 3HWLWLRQHU
6KUL 3UDGHHS &KDQGUD
6KUL %3 6ULYDVWDYD
&RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQWV
6&

&RQVWLWXWLRQ
RI
,QGLD
$UWLFOH

±
$SSRLQWPHQW
RQ
WKH
SRVW
RI
/DE
7HFKQLFLDQV
ZLWKRXW
DGYHUWLVHPHQW
ZLWKRXW DGRSWLQJ SUHVFULEHG SURFHGXUH ±
HYHQ QRW SRVVHVVLQJ UHTXLVLWH WUDLQLQJ ±
QRW HQWLWOHG IRU DQ\ UHOLHIHQWLUH VDODU\
SXUVXDQW
WR
H[
SDUWH
LQWHULP
RUGHU
UHLPEXUVHG
&KLHI
6HFUHWDU\
WR
KROG
HQTXLU\WDNH VXLWDEOH DFWLRQ DJDLQVW WKH
JXLOW\ RIILFHU
+HOG ± 3DUD
,W LV PDGH FOHDU WKDW WKRXJK LW LV D ILW
FDVH ZKHUH 3HWLWLRQHU VKRXOG EH UHTXLUHG
WR UHLPEXUVH HQWLUH VDODU\ SDLG XQGHU
LQWHULP RUGHU RI WKLV &RXUW EXW IRU WKH
IDFW WKDW KH ZDV SDLG HQWLUH DPRXQW E\
ZD\ RI VDODU\ XQGHU LQWHULP RUGHU GDWHG
WK 'HFHPEHU ZKLFK ZDV SDVVHG
LQ DEVHQFH RI WKH &RXQWHU $IILGDYLW 7KLV
&RXUW
FDQQRW
LJQRUH
WKH
IDFW
WKDW
3HWLWLRQHU LV QRW DORQH UHVSRQVLEOH IRU
REWDLQLQJ
DQ
LOOHJDO
DSSRLQWPHQW
DQG
DOVR RWKHU UHVSRQVLEOH SHUVRQ KROGLQJ
WKH SRVW WKDW RI 'LUHFWRU *HQHUDO 0HGLFDO
(GXFDWLRQ DQG 7UDLQLQJ DQG 3ULQFLSDO RI
0DKDUDQL
/D[PL
%DL
0HGLFDO
&ROOHJH
-KDQVL DUH DOVR LQYROYHG LW ZLOO QRW EH
H[SHGLHQW WR SXQLVK WKH 3HWLWLRQHU DORQH
SDUWLFXODUO\
ZKHQ
KH
KDV
UHQGHUHG
VHUYLFHV LQYROYLQJ SK\VLFDO YROLWLRQ ,W LV
KRZHYHU D ILW FDVH ZKHUH D FHUWLILHG
FRS\ RI WKLV MXGJHPHQW EH VHQW WR WKH
&KLHI 6HFUHWDU\ *RYHUQPHQW RI 8WWDU
3UDGHVK /XFNQRZ IRU WDNLQJ QHFHVVDU\
DFWLRQ DIWHU KROGLQJ QHFHVVDU\ HQTXLU\
DQG VXLWDEOH DFWLRQ PD\ EH WDNHQ DV PD\
EH DGYLVHG DQG GHHPHG SURSHU LQ WKH
IDFWV RI WKH FDVH

By the Court

1. Admittedly, petitioner Shri Ram
Briksha Chaudhari, was appointed by the
Principal, Maharani Laxmi Bai Medical
College, Jhansi as is evident from perusal
of his appointment letter dated 22nd
February, 1995 (Annexure-1 to the Writ
Petition). There is no averment that the
post was ever advertised. From the record
of the petition it is evident that the
Petitioner was appointed without adopting
prescribed
procedure
for
making
appointment.

2. Moreover, there is no averment
nor any material on record to show that
Petitioner, who did not possess requisite
training
of
Lab-Technician,
was
appointed under constraints of nonavailability of a qualified candidate. It is
queer to note that no effort was made to
advertise the post and select best available
candidate at that time. Petitioner alleges
that he was not permitted to complete
requisite training in pursuance to the
condition contained in the aforesaid
appointment letter (Annexure-1 to the
Writ Petition) and in its support he has
filed two documents (Annexures-4 and 5
to the Petition) wherefrom it appears that
Petitioner applied to the Director General
for according permission to him for