- (1.) Heard Shri Janardan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel and perused the record.
(2.) Facts in brief of the present case are that the petitioner's husband namely Shri Ramesh Singh who was working and discharging his duties on the post of Constable under opposite party no.4/Commandant, 35th Vahini PAC, Lucknow, died on 23.4.2005 during the tenure of his services.
(3.) As there was no other member in the family of the deceased to earn livelihood, so the petitioner submitted an application for considering her case to give compassionate appointment under Dying-In-Harness Rules, 1974, but no heed has been paid, so for redressal of her grievances, she approached this Court by filing the Writ Petition No.123 (SS) of 2011 "Smt. Seema Singh vs. State of U.P.", disposed of by judgment and order dated 12.1.2011, on re-production the same reads as under:- "Heard Sri Janardan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the opposite parties. Petitioner's husband died in harness. Petitioner applied for a job and she was offered job on the post of Constable. Unfortunately, the parameters fixed for the post contains a condition that the weight of the incumbent should not be more than 58 kilograms. The petitioner's weight is 65 kilograms which is beyond the prescribed weight limit. Vide letter dated December 22, 2009 the petitioner has been directed to move another application for some other post in which the petitioner has the qualification. The case of the petitioner has been rejected for appointment on Constable but other options have been kept open by the opposite parties. As such, the petitioner is being offered a job under dying in harness rules. The grievance of the petitioner is that the husband of the petitioner died in 2004. Five years have passed since then and the job has not been given to her. The petitioner is suffering for lack of finances and she is in dire need of a job. Learned counsel for the petitioner has informed orally that the application for another suitable appointment has already been moved by the petitioner and the same may be considered. Since the opposite parties are acting fairly themselves, no further direction is required. However, since the matter is pending since 2004, the opposite parties are directed to look into the matter and give the appointment on any suitable post to the petitioner very urgently, say within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before them. With these observations the writ petition is disposed of finally.";