Rakesh Sharma - (1.) -Heard Sri Niraj Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel on behalf of the respondents.
(2.) LEARNED standing counsel, who represents the respondents, was granted one month's time to file a counter-affidavit, but no counter-affidavit has been filed. The petitioner has brought to the notice of the Court various judgments by which the controversy raised in this petition "whether the daughter-in-law who becomes a member of her husband's family after marriage is included within the definition of family of her father-in-law" has been set at rest. The reference of these judgments are as follows : Smt. Sanyogita Rai v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, 2006 (2) 1972 ; Zila Panchayat, Kaushambi and another v. Lalti Devi and another, 2008 (2) ADJ 428 : 2008 (1) AWC 1035 (DB) and C.M.D., U. P. Power Corporation Ltd., Lucknow and others v. Jitendra Pratap Singh and another, 2008 (2) ADJ 433 (DB). It emerges from the record that the petitioner Smt. Geeta Singh's father-in-law, Anil Kumar Singh, who was working as Assistant Development Officer (Co-operative) had died in harness on 30.4.2007, leaving behind his wife Smt. Naina Singh and daughter-in-law, Smt. Gita Singh. It is noteworthy that late Anil Kumar Singh's son, namely, Shiv Pratap Singh (husband of petitioner Smt. Gita Singh) had died prior to his father Anil Kumar Singh's death. Thus the dependants of the family comprises of two ladies, namely, Smt. Naina Singh w/o the deceased employee and young daughter-in-law, Smt. Gita Singh, having three minor children and other members to sustain in life. Wife of the deceased employee Sri Anil Kumar Singh approached the concerned authorities, i.e., Joint Registrar Co-operative Societies, U. P. Lucknow and District Assistant Registrar of the same department seeking compassionate appointment for educated daughter-in-law to enable the family to sustain. The young daughter-in-law is having intermediate qualification and is eligible for providing appropriate employment in the department.
(3.) IN the relevant documents relating to payment of pensionary benefits, G.P.F., Gratuity etc., the petitioner, daughter-in-law, has been shown as one of the nominees of late Sri Anil Kumar Singh. It appears that the matter was referred to the State Government after submitting the application by mother-in-law, Smt. Naina Singh for appointment of the petitioner, daughter-in-law of late Anil Kumar Singh, which was rejected on the ground that daughter-in-law cannot be treated to be a family member of the deceased employee. The daughter-in-law does not become the family member according to the definition clause of U. P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants (Dying in Harness) Rules, 1974, as it has not been included in the definition of the family. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, the impugned order passed by respondents declining to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner is wholly illegal and is against the very spirit of the judgments rendered by this Court, as indicated in the foregoing part of this judgment and order.;