- (1.) V. M. Sahai, J. Heard Sri B. S. Yadav learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri D. S. Shukla, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.
(2.) THE father of the petitioner was constable in CRPF. He died on 22-2-1991. THE petitioner moved an application claiming appointment under the Dying in Harness Rules. THE respondents by order passed in January 1995 which has been filed as Annexure 5 to the writ petition held that the petitioner was found unfit for the post of constable and the widow was intimated that her son could be appointed as water carrier. It was further stated in paragraph 5 of the counter-affidavit that the petitioner could not complete one mile race in scheduled time and he could not qualify in the physical test, therefore, he cannot be appointed as constable in CRPF. THE petitioner states that he is ready to accept the appointment as water carrier. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents have stated that due to pendency of this petition the ap pointment as water carrier could not be given to the petitioner. In this view of the matter this writ petition is finally disposed of with direc tion to the respondents to appoint the petitioner under the Dying in Harness Rules on the post of water carrier within two months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the con cerned respondent. The eligibility of the petitioner will be considered from the date when he applied for being appointed under the Dying in Harness Rules. There shall be no order as to costs. WP disposed of. .;