ARCHANA SAXENA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Click here to view full judgement.
BARIN GHOSH, J. -
(1.) THERE has been 165 days delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly,
an Application has been filed for condonation of delay in preferring the
appeal. The reasons furnished therein are not sufficient at all. No
explanation as to what the appellant did after she returned having had
stayed away for a period of about a month has been furnished. Be that as
it may, we allow the Application. Having had allowed the Application, we
have heard the learned counsel for the parties on merits.
(2.) THE application made by the appellant, second wife of the deceased employee of respondent No.3, seeking an appointment on
compassionate ground, having been rejected, the appellant filed a writ
petition. That writ petition having been dismissed, appellant has
preferred the present appeal.
(3.) IT is not in dispute that the wife of the deceased employee of respondent No.3 is still alive. There is no concept of a second wife
under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Marriage, after coming into force of
the said Act, during the lifetime of a spouse living, has been declared
by Section 11 thereof as null and void. In the circumstances, appellant
never had acquired, nor can ever acquire the status of wife of the
deceased employee. Since she is not the wife of the deceased employee,
she is not covered by the Rules made for giving compassionate
appointment, as right to be considered for compassionate appointment, in
terms of the Rules, is confined to wife, son and daughter of the
deceased. Inasmuch as the appellant is not the wife of the deceased
employee, she is not a heir of the deceased employee, inasmuch as,
Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 has classified those
relatives specified in Class -I of the Schedule as the heirs of the
deceased Hindu. In Class -I of the Schedule, while wife has been
mentioned, in order to be a heir by virtue of being related as a wife,
the person claiming has to establish that, in law, she can be regarded as
wife. In those circumstances, appellant did not inherit the deceased
employee, a Hindu governed by the laws mentioned above, in respect of his
retiral dues on account of Provident Fund, gratuity, etc.
We, accordingly, find that there is nothing to be done in the appeal. The same is dismissed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.