Smt. Vidyawati vs State of M.P. and Others

Hon. Shri Justice Sujoy Paul

The petitioner, a widow of Constable Moti Lal filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner''s husband Moti Lal working in Special Armed Force died in an attack by Naxelites in Langi District Balaghat on 16th July, 1991. The petitioner preferred her claims arising out of sad and sudden demise of her husband.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the petition, various reliefs have already been granted and she confines her relief as under:

(1) She be given a house under Development Authority Scheme by the State Government.

(2) Her son-in-law be given compassionate appointment.

The learned counsel for the petitioner, by placing reliance on Annexure P-9 dated 23.10.1991, submits that accommodations are provided to various dependents of police employees in various Housing Boards/Development Authorities.

Shri Raghavendra Dixit, learned Government Advocate submits that as per the policy of compassionate appointment, there is no provision for granting compassionate appointment to the son-in-law and the rejection order dated 12.3.1998 reflects the same. He submits that an option was given to the petitioner to submit an application for her daughter for appointment on compassionate ground. But it is not clear whether the petitioner has preferred such application.

Ms. Sarita Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to submit an application for compassionate appointment for her daughter pursuant to letter dated 12.3.1998.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The twin relief claimed by the petitioner is being examined by this Court. Annexure P-9 dated 23.10.1991 only shows that the respondents have inquired about the desire of the dependents of the deceased employees to obtain an accommodation of Housing Board/Development Authority. In turn, the Commandant, 10th Battalion was directed to furnish information whether such accommodations are available or not. It is conclusively not clear whether such accommodations are provided to the dependents of the deceased police employees, who died in Naxelite''s attacks. However, if such accommodations are provided to the similarly situated persons, there is no reason to deprive the petitioner from the same benefit.

In this view of the matter, the petitioner is permitted to prefer a representation showing her intention to get an accommodation of that nature in Housing Board/Development Authority and if such a representation is preferred, the respondents No. 1,2 and 5 shall deal with it by applying principles of parity and take a decision on the same within two months and the outcome of such communication shall be communicated to the petitioner. In absence of showing any provision which makes the son-in-law entitled for compassionate appointment, I am unable to hold that respondents have committed any error in passing the order dated 12.3.1998 declining compassionate appointment for son-in-law. However, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer representation of her daughter pursuant to Annexure R-2 for compassionate appointment before respondents No. 1,2 and 5 alongwith copy of this order within two months from today. If such a representation is preferred, the respondents may examine the claim of compassionate appointment pursuant to their own order dated 12.3.1998 in favour of the petitioner''s daughter. The decision be taken within two months from the date of receiving the representation and a reasoned and speaking order be passed within two months therefrom.

With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of.