B. Amit Sthalekar, J. - (1.) Heard Shri Jeevan Prakash Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Mata Prasad, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) The petitioner is seeking quashing of the order dated 21.9.2016 whereby her claim for appointment on compassionate ground has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner is a citizen of Nepal as per the documents produced by her and therefore not being an Indian citizen is not entitled for government job in India.
(3.) The contention of the petitioner in the writ petition is that she was married with Yogendra Prasad Choudhary, as stated in paragraph 4 of the writ petition. Late Yogendra Prasad Choudhary died on 21.2.2013 while still in service. The petitioner applied for compassionate appointment. Her claim has been rejected by the impugned order on the ground that she is a Nepali by citizenship as per the documents produced by her. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that she is a Nepali and is a citizen of Nepal but contention is that by marrying an Indian she acquired the Indian citizenship. He further submits that under the Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 the only criteria is that a person must be a member of the family of the deceased government employee and therefore it is irrelevant that she is a Nepali or otherwise. Reliance has been placed upon a judgement of the learned Single Judge of the Patna High Court in Case No. 8389 of 1994 (Sumitra Devi v. State of Bihar) 1997 (2) PLJR 215 , copy of which has been filed as Annexure-15 to the writ petition. Paragraph 8 of the judgement reads as under: 8. In the instant case the object under Annexure-1 is to grant sustenance to the family of the deceased government servant and not to give any such benefit only to the citizens of this country. Thus, in my opinion, the dependents of the government servant dying in harness will be persons similarly situate irrespective of their citizenship. the learned Counsel for the State has not brought any law to my notice whereby and where under non-citizens have been placed in a separate class for grant of benefit of appointment on compassionate ground under Annexure-1. There cannot be any dispute that the state can frame law putting the citizens and non-citizens in a separate class on the basis of a reasonable and rational classification. But in absence of any such law the action of the State in treating them differently, in my opinion, violates Article 14 of the constitution of India.;