Aarti Devi, v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.479 of 2020 ====================================================== Aarti Devi, W/O Late Basudeo Gupta, resident of Line Bazar, P.S.K. Hat, P.P. and District- Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

The Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Buxar. 4.

The District Compassionate Committee through the Collector, Buxar. 5.

The Deputy Collector, Establishment, Buxar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Adv Ms. Asha Verma, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Nagendra Kumar, AC to AAG-IX ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 04-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned state counsel.

The undisputed facts are that the petitioner's husband was employed in the Health Department on the post of Aniugyapan Pradhikari (Licensing Officer). While in service he died on 20.01.2008. The petitioner is the second wife of the employee who died-in-harness.

The writ application has been filed seeking quashing of the decision of the District Compassionate Committee dated 10.08.2015.

2/5 The claim of the petitioner has been rejected by assigning the following reasons:- "इनककी मृत्यु सेववाकवाल में ददिननांक 20.01.2008 कको हयुई ह। इनककी पत्नन मयु० आरतकी दिसेवकी नसे अनयुकम्पवा कसे आधवार पर दनयुदकत हसेतयु आवसेदिन पत्र ददिननांक 05.08.2014 कको ददियवा ह। इनककी शहक्षदणिक यकोग्यतवा मध्यमवा एव जन्म दतदथ 26.05.1984 ह। दवभवाग से पवाप्त पदतवसेदिन कसे अनयुसवार आवसेददिकवा मृत सरकवारकी सेवक कसे दद्वितकीय पत्नन ह, जबदक पथम पत्नन से भकी सवतवान ह। ददिननांक 21.03.2015 कको आयकोदजत अनयुकम्पवा सदमदत ककी बहठक में दवभवाग से दद्वितकीय पत्नन कको अनयुकम्पवा कसे आधवार पर दनयुदकत हसेतयु अनयुशवसवा करनसे कसे दबन्दियु पर पदतवसेदिन पवाप्त करनसे हसेतयु दलयसे गयसे दनणिर्णय कसे आलकोक में इस कवायर्यालय कसे पत्रनांक 01-1908 ददिननांक 26.12.

2014 द्विवारवा दसदवल सजर्णन, बकसर से पदतवसेदिन ककी मवाग ककी गई थकी। दसदवल सजर्णन, बकसर द्विवारवा अपनसे पत्रनांक 485, ददिननांक 18.03.

3/5 पत्र में पथम पतकी कवा नवाम एव पयुदत्रययों कवा नवाम अवदकत नहहीं दकयसे जवानसे कसे सवबवध में यह उल्लसेख दकयवा गयवा ह दक पथम पतकी कवा नवाम एव उनकसे पयुदत्रययों कवा नवाम मदलवश अवदकत नहहीं दकयवा गयवा हकोगवा। सदमदत इस तथ्य से असहमत ह। स्व० बवासयुदिसेव गयुप्तवा ककी पथम पतकी ककी 6 पयुदत्रयनां ह, दजसमें से दकसकी भकी पयुत्रकी कवा शपथ पत्र नहहीं ह। आवसेदिन पत्र में आवसेददिकवा द्विवारवा अनयुकम्पवा सदमदत कसे समक्ष गलत तथ्य पस्तयुत दकयवा गयवा ह और न हहीं दिदसरकी शवादिकी दकयसे जवानसे कवा ककोई सवाक्ष्य हकी पस्तयुत दकयवा गयवा ह। अततः सदमदत द्विवारवा सवर्णसम्मदत से इस मवामलयों कको अस्वकीकमृत करनसे कवा दनणिर्णय दलयवा गयवा।"

It is submitted by the petitioner's counsel that the petitioner is beneficiary of the family pension of the deceased Shri. Basudeo Gupta, which is evident from the pension payment order (Annexure- 6). The rejection by the District Compassionate Committee is, therefore, clearly unsustainable as the authorities have unnecessarily raised the issue regarding legitimacy of the petitioner's second marriage with the employee who died-in-harness.

The learned state counsel, on the other hand, submits that the date of application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment is 05.08.2014. This fact being admitted, it is obvious that the application was time barred under the compassionate appointment scheme which provides for making an application within five years from the date (20.01.2008) of

4/5 death of the employee. The petitioner not only made belated application before the authorities but has also approached this Court more than four years after the rejection of the claim by the District Compassionate Committee. The prayer, therefore, may not be entertained by this Court.

Considering the rival submissions, this Court would take notice of the settled law in so far as compassionate appointment is concerned. The time within which the benefit is to be claimed and granted, therefore, is of great significance, since the purpose compassionate appointment is to provide succour to the family on account of sudden loss of the bread earner.

In the instant case, the application is admittedly belated. Apparently the petitioner did not have any difficulty in getting over the crisis caused by loss of the bread earner. The Court would also observe that even after rejection of the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment, petitioner has sat over the same for more than four years and suddenly arisen from deep slumber to approach this Court. The application made before this Court is also barred by delay and laches.

For reason noted above, the writ application is devoid

5/5 of merit, and is dismissed.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) SUMIT/- U