- (1.) THESE three appeals raise common issues for consideration of this Court and, therefore, are being taken up together.
(2.) THE facts of the Special Appeal no.356 of 2012, Shiv Kumar Dubey vs. State of U.P. and others are as follows:- THE petitioner filed Writ Petition No.76510 of 2011. THE father of the petitioner while still working in Prathmik Vidyalaya Chivdahi as Assistant Teacher expired on 25.3.1996. THE petitioner being elder son of the deceased was a minor at the time of his father's death but after attaining the age of majority he applied for being given appointment on compassionate ground on 17.10.2003. According to the case of the appellant-petitioner, the respondent orally refused to provide him compassionate appointment and, therefore, he filed a Writ Petition No.25501 of 2011, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 10.5.2011 with a direction to the respondents to take a decision in the matter of the petitioner. In compliance of the order of the High Court, the respondents considered the case of the petitioner and rejected his representation by order dated 20.9.2011 on the ground that since at the time of death of the deceased employee the appellant-petitioner was a minor, therefore, no vacancy could be kept unfilled till he attains the age of majority. It was further stated that in terms of para 3(8) of Govt. Notification No.5193/15-5-2000-400 (222)/99 dated 4.9.2000 an application for seeking compassionate appointment will be entertained only within a period of five years from the date of death of the deceased. However, where the State Government is of the view that there were exceptional difficulties and circumstances on account of which the persons seeking compassionate appointment could not submit the application within a period of five years, their application may be considered beyond a period of five years in relaxation of the Rules. THE above condition of relaxation is provided in Rule 5(iii) of THE U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness (7th Amendment) Rules, 2006. However, the claim of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that the application had been submitted by the petitioner after considerable delay and there was no explanation for such delay in the application, therefore, he was not entitled for grant of appointment on compassionate grounds and the application dated 18.5.2011 was accordingly rejected. Aggrieved by the order dated 20.9.2011 rejecting his application dated 18.5.2011 the petitioner filed writ petition no.76510 of 2011. The said writ petition was dismissed by the learned single Judge vide judgement and order dated 3.1.2012 which has given rise to the present special appeal. The Special Appeal No.379 of 2012, Govind Singh vs. State of U.P. and others has been filed against the judgment and order dated 1.2.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition no.4761 of 2012 of the appellant- petitioner. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner's father (late) Mohan Lal Rathore was a permanent Assistant Teacher in Sri Gandhi Janta Inter College, Bhunna, Kannauj and while in service he expired on 26.4.2000. It was stated that two applications were filed on 30.11.2002 and 3.7.20003 by the mother of the petitioner wherein it was stated that at the time of death of Mohan Lal Rathore, the petitioner Govind Singh was a minor and that he may be considered for being given compassionate appointment when he attains the age of majority. The petitioner upon becoming a major and in the meantime completing his B.A. and B.Ed. submitted two applications dated 27.4.2010 and 23.6.2011 seeking compassionate appointment as untrained Assistant Teacher. The two applications of the petitioner being barred by time it appears that the matter was referred to the State Government and the State Government vide order dated 9.1.2012 has rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the said appellant could not be given compassionate appointment beyond the period of five years and it was not a fit case for granting relaxation in the case of the petitioner. Aggrieved the petitioner filed writ petition no.4761 of 2012, Govind Singh vs. State of U.P. and others which was dismissed by learned Single Judge by judgement and order dated 1.2.2012 giving rise to the present Special Appeal.
(3.) IN Special Appeal No.371 of 2012, Ashok Kumar vs. State of U.P. and others, the facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner's father (late) Sri Om Singh was posted as a constable in District Budaun and he expired on 26.7.1993 while in service. The mother of the petitioner submitted an application before the authorities on 1.10.20008 wherein it was stated that at the time of death of her husband Sri Om Singh on 26.7.1993, the petitioner was a minor, being only two years of age, and that he attained the age of majority on 12.8.2009 and has also completed his INtermediate and, therefore, he may be considered for being given appointment on compassionate grounds. The application, it appears, was referred to the State Government but the request was declined on the ground that the deceased employee had expired in the year 1993 and the application was being submitted after more than 16 years. It was further mentioned that the purpose of giving compassionate appointment was to provide immediate relief to the family of the deceased employee. It was also stated that the wife of late Om Singh could have applied for compassionate appointment on the ground of financial difficulties at the relevant point of time but she did not do so rather she waited for her son to attain the age of majority. IN the circumstances, no relaxation could be granted to the petitioner for being given compassionate appointment. Aggrieved by the order dated 29.11.2010,the petitioner filed Writ Petition No.6462 of 2011, Ashok Kumar vs. State of U.P. and others which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge by his order dated 1.12.2011. From the facts narrated above, it will be seen that the common thread running through the above three cases is that the claim of the appellant- petitioners, therein has been rejected on the ground that at the time of death of the deceased employee they were minor and their applications seeking compassionate appointment were submitted after a considerable lapse of time and in any case beyond the period of five years as stipulated by the Rules and Govt. Notification, on their attaining the age of majority. The sole question for consideration before us now is that whether in such circumstances appointment on compassionate ground can be provided to the minor of the deceased government servant where such application is made after inordinate delay and passage of several years and in any case, beyond the period of five years from the date of death of the deceased employee as stipulated in the Rules.;