Urmila Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17751 of 2014 =========================================================== Urmila Devi (Widow) W/o Late Arjun Prasad Yadav residence of village - Bhuaalchak, P.O. - Makanpur, P.S. Warshaliganj, District - Nawada, Bihar. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Secretary, Public Grievances Cell, C.M. Secretariat, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Deputy Secretary, Home Department, (Public Grievances Cell), Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Deputy/Under Secretary Home (Spl) Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Magistrate, Nawada, Bihar.

5. The District Establishment Deputy Collector, Nawada, Bihar.

6. The Deputy Collector, Nawada, Bihar.

7. The S.P. Nawada, Bihar.

8. The District Welfare Officer, Nawada, Bihar.

9. The District Education Superintendent, Nawada, Bihar.

10. The District Education Programme Officer, Nawada, Bihar.

11. The B.D.O. Warshaliganj, Nawada, Bihar.

12. The Executive Engineer, Nawada, Bihar. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Apurva Kumar, AC to GA 4 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 28-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that her husband has lost his life in caste violence. Her case was considered for compassionate appointment in the meeting of the District Compassionate Committee dated 16.12.2009 but till date neither the appointment has been offered nor any communication has been sent with respect to the final decision on the claim of the petitioner. Counsel for the State submits that under certain orders

Patna High Court CWJC No.17751 of 2014 dt.28-08-2018 2/2 of this Court, the scheme for offering compassionate appointment to the victim of such violence who are not Government employees have been held to be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Submission of learned counsel for the State would have been considered had there been a final decision in respect of petitioner's claim. On 16.12.2009 petitioner's claim has been recommended along with various others. In view of same, petitioner is entitled to the final decision on her claim. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the respondent no.4 shall take a final decision on the claim of the petitioner. While doing so, respondent no.4 shall maintain parity in the matter of consideration with other similarly situated persons. Let the final decision be communicated to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) Shashi.

AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date5.9.2018 Transmission Date NA