AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Harun-Ul-Rashid, J.—The Petitioner is the widow of deceased Sri.Sunil George who was a Head Constable in Border Security Force under the Government of India. The said Sunil George died in an encounter with militants while special joint operations of B.S.F and Maghalaya Police in West Garo Hills in Meghalaya.
The petitioner is an unemployed women studied up to Pre- degree course and having I.T.I certificate in Stenography in English.
Ext.P1 is the Government Order conferring employment assistance in the State Government Service, to dependents of killed B.S.F Personnels. It is the case of the petitioner that she is entitled to get employment in the State Government Service as the dependent of the deceased BSF Personnel. By Ext.P3 order dated 16-09-2003, her application was rejected by the Government stating that the death of her husband was not attributable to military service.
The petitioner challenged Ext.P3 order of the Government. By Ext.P4 judgment dated 20.9.2006 this Court held that the husband of the petitioner died in an encounter with the local militants in a joint effort with police personnels of Meghalaya and if so, it is to be held that the husband of the petitioner died under the circumstances mentioned in Ext.P1 while he was employed in military or of B.S.F Service and If so the stand taken in Ext.P1 cannot have any existence. This Court quashed Ext.P3 and the matter is remanded to the 1st respondent to take a fresh decision in the matter within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
Ext.P4 judgment of this Court clearly reveals that Ext.P1 Government order is applicable to the case of the Petitioner. Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court in Ext.P4 Judgment the Government passed Ext.P5 order which is more or less the same as Ext.P3 order. The reasons for rejection of petitioner''s claim as stated in Ext.P3 are repeated in Ext.P5 order. So far as this Court considered the question and held that the petitioner is entitled to the benefits under Ext.P1 Government Order, the Government cannot defy this Court''s direction and decline to grant the benefits to the petitioner. In stead of allowing the claim of the petitioner, the Government passed Ext.P5 order which is more or less the same as Ext.P3 order which was once quashed by this Court. In the circumstances, I quash Ext.P5 order and directs the 1st respondent to appoint the petitioner in State Government service within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. This writ petition is allowed.