Gyanti Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9288 of 2014 =========================================================== Gyanti Devi, Wife of Shri Ram Krishna Sah, resident of Village+ Police StationPurnahiya, P.O.- Basantpatti, District- Sheohar, Bihar. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The Chief Engineer (Machinery), Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

4. The Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Circle (Machinery), Water Resources Department, Mithapur, Patna

5. The Executive Engineer (Machinery), Field Machinery Division, Digha Karbigahiya at Patna .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Shiya Ram Sahi, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, A.C. to G.A.13 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 06-10-2016 Annexure-6, dated 10.03.2014 is under challenge. By virtue of this order, the respondent authorities have refused to grant benefit of compassionate appointment to the petitioner on the ground that she is married and settled in life and there is no provision for grant of benefit of compassionate appointment to such children. A plea is taken that petitioner is an abandoned wife, therefore, she is in distress and this aspect of the matter has not been considered.

In the opinion of the Court this is a plea which has been taken only for deriving benefit of compassionate appointment but

Patna High Court CWJC No.9288 of 2014 dt.06-10-2016 2 / 2 there is no evidence on record of authentic kind or a declaration from any court for such status of the petitioner.

The policy of compassionate appointment has not been put in place to provide employment to otherwise unemployed or unemployable wards and siblings of a government servant. The Court is not convinced that the reason given by the respondents in Annexure-6 is irrational and perverse.

Writ is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) S.Kumar/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 06.10.2016 Transmission Date