Last Updated on
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1185 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6067 of 2008 ====================================================== Amrita Kumari, D/o Late Parasnath Choubey, R/o Village-Jasvali, P.S. Ketya, District- Gopalganj. .... .... Petitioner/Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Patna. 3. District Magistrate, Gopalganj. 4. District Superintendent of Education, Gopalganj. .... .... Respondents/Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Singh Mr. Amarendra Kumar Sinha 1, Advocates. For the Respondent/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
2 15-09-2011 Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 13th May 2011
passed by the learned single Judge in above CWJC No. 6067 of
2008, the writ petitioner has preferred the present Appeal under
Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.
The appellant-writ petitioner, daughter of one
Parasnath Choubey, seeks compassionate employment. The said
Parasnath Choubey, an Assistant Teacher in a Government
Primary School, was killed on 12th April 1998. The claim for
compassionate employment made by his daughter Mamta Kumari,
the elder sister of the appellant, was rejected on the ground that
the wife of the deceased was in employment and that the claim
2 Patna High Court LPA No.1185 of 2011 (2) dt.15-09-2011
was contrary to the Scheme for compassionate employment.
The appellant, on attaining the age of majority
applied for compassionate employment in 2002. Similarly, her
claim has been rejected.
Feeling aggrieved the appellant filed above CWJC
NO. 6067 of 2008 under Article 226 of the Constitution. The
learned single Judge has upheld the decision of the District
Compassionate Appointment Committee. The petition has been
rejected as the claim for compassionate employment made by the
appellant is contrary to the Scheme for compassionate
employment. Therefore, the present Appeal.
Learned advocate Mr. Arun Kumar Singh has
appeared for the appellant. He has submitted that the learned
single Judge has not considered the certificate (Annexure-3 to the
writ petition). He has submitted that the Mukhiya of the Gram
Panchayat did certify that the appellant was living separately from
We see no merit in the argument. The certificate in
question issued by the Mukhiya on 12th December 2007 has no
sanctity. The Appeal is dismissed in limine.
(R.M. Doshit, CJ) Sujit/- (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)