Supreme CourtDivision Bench(2011) 05 SC CK 0043

State of H.P. and Others vs Kalawati and Others

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 5 May 2011 · Citation: (2011) 12 SCC 734

HON’BLE JUDGES
Deepak Verma, J · Dalveer Bhandari, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Appeal No. 3972 of 2011 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 21865 of 2010)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 422 words
1.

Leave granted.

2.

The case of the Respondent herein is different from the batch of appeals decided today by this Court with the title "State of Himachal Pradesh v. Sarab Dayal Civil Appeal Arising out SLP (C) No. 362 of 2008". The Respondent No. 1 Kalawati's husband-Rameshwar Singh, who was on duty as Chowkidar in the Store Department in the National Highway Division, Solan at Tamboo More, was attacked by some people and he was badly injured. He was treated at P.G. I., Chandigarh for about six to seven months but due to the serious injuries sustained by him while on duty on 5.2.1999 after a lapse of about 11 years, we are told that, he is still in the state of Coma. The State of Himachal Pradesh on 26.10.2002 passed the following order:

HIMACHAL PRADESH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

OFFICE ORDER

Consequent upon his invalidation declared by Medical Board Distt. Hospital Solan on account of his completely and permanently incapacitated for further service of any kind in the department vide their report on form 23 of dated 1.3.02, Sh. Rameshwar Singh, Chowkidar of this office is hereby retired from Govt. Service w.e.f.1.3.02(A.N.) under Rule 38 of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. He shall treat himself relieved on 1.3.02 (A.N.).

Sd/- Executive Engineer National Highway

Division

HP, PWD, Solan No. NHD-CB-Pension/03-5013-20 Dt.26.10.02

Copy to following for information and necessary action:

1.

The Sr. Deputy Accountant General, H.P. Shimla.

2.

The Engineer-in-Chief, HP, PWD, Delhi.

3.

In this view of the matter, the case of the Respondent is different from that of others cases. It was wrongly tagged with other cases. We have heard learned Counsel for the State of Himachal Pradesh and the learned Counsel for the Respondent. We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment of the High Court.

4.

It may be relevant to mention here that the Respondent No. 1 on 25.02.2002 gave a representation to the Chief Minister for employment to Laxmi Singh, one of the sons of Rameshwar Singh on compassionate grounds. Unfortunately till date his representation has not been considered. We have handed over a copy of the representation to learned Counsel for the State, who may forward it to the concerned authorities of the State of Himachal Pradesh. We direct the State of Himachal Pradesh to consider the representation of the Respondent sympathetically and accommodate Laxmi Singh, Son of Rameshwar Sngh in any suitable job.

5.

With these observations, the appeal is disposed of, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.