Allahabad High Court

AMAN MAHAJANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 30 September 2026
Bench: MANJU RANI CHAUHAN

Holding

The impugned order rejecting the compassionate appointment is quashed as it was based on a forged certificate.

Summary

The petitioner, Aman Mahajan, filed a writ petition challenging the rejection of his application for a compassionate appointment by the District Basic Education Officer, Aligarh. The rejection was based on the claim that his mother, Anita Gupta, was already in government service, a claim the petitioner contested, alleging that Anita Gupta was not his mother and had forged a varisan certificate to claim a pension. The respondent submitted legal heir certificates showing that the petitioner and his sister were heirs of the deceased employee Parveen Gupta, while the certificate presented by Anita Gupta was found to be forged. The Court examined the authenticity of the certificates and concluded that the document on which the impugned order relied was indeed forged. Consequently, the Court quashed the order dated 25.07.2026 and directed the respondent to reconsider the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment as a legal heir, subject to statutory qualifications. The petition was allowed and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration within a month.

Issues considered

Whether the order rejecting the petitioner's compassionate appointment, based on the assertion that his mother is in service, is valid in view of alleged forgery of the supporting certificate.
Whether the certificate relied upon by the authorities is forged.
Whether the petitioner qualifies as a legal heir and dependent eligible for compassionate appointment under the applicable rules.

Subjects

compassionate appointment
forged certificate
legal heir
district basic education officer
Uttar Pradesh
writ petition
quash order

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 13300 of 2026

Aman Mahajan
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pawan Kumar Bhardwaj, Pramod
Bhardwaj
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Court No. - 52
HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing
Counsel for the State.

The writ petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the order
dated 25.07.2026 passed by the District Basic Education Officer,
Aligarh, by which the claim of the petitioner for compassionate
appointment has been rejected on the ground that his mother, namely
Anita Gupta, is already in service.

On 31.08.2026, the following order was passed:-

"Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead "Management
Committee, Shree Mahauru Purv Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Jwalapuri, District-
Aligarh" as respondent no.5, during the course of the day.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shailendra Singh, learned
Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated
25.07.2026 passed by Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Aligarh, by which
respondent No. 3 rejected the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate
grounds.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's father, who was
working as a Clerk in Shree Mahauru Purv Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Jwalapuri,
District-Aligarh, died in harness on 17.04.2021. The petitioner moved an
WRIA No. 13300 of 2026
2

application for compassionate appointment, which has been rejected by the
impugned order on the ground that his mother, namely Anita Gupta, is in
government service. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that
Anita Gupta is not the mother of the petitioner, as his father was married to
Parveen Gupta. It appears that Anita Gupta got a forged varisan certificate
prepared, on the basis of which she is receiving the pension to which the
petitioner is entitled and claiming herself to be the mother of the petitioner.
Believing the said forged certificate to be true, the authorities, without verifying
from the records, have passed the impugned order.

Learned Standing Counsel prays for and is granted two weeks' time to file short
counter affidavit.

Issue notice to respondent no. 5 by both modes, i.e., by regular mode as well as
dasti summons. Steps be taken within three days.

Put up this case on 17th September, 2026 as fresh."

In the short counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.3, it
has been stated that the legal heirs certificate/family register dated
15.06.2018 records the legal heirs of the deceased Parveen Gupta as
Kaushal Kishore Gupta (husband), the petitioner Aman Mahajan
(son) and Aahna Mahajan (daughter), as is evident from page-9 of
the short counter affidavit. Another certificate dated 18.05.2022,
issued after the death of Kaushal Kishore Gupta, husband of Parveen
Gupta, is at page-10 of the short counter affidavit.

The names of the petitioner and his sister Aahna Mahajan are
mentioned in both certificates, which were issued after the death of
Parveen Gupta, the petitioner's name finding place in the certificate
issued even after the death of his father Kaushal Kishore Gupta. As
against this, the legal heirs certificate dated 27.05.2021, which was
procured by Anita Gupta, who is not the legally wedded wife of
Kaushal Kishore, is forged.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This Court finds that, from the records, it is clear that the certificate,
WRIA No. 13300 of 2026
3

relying upon which the claim of the petitioner has been rejected, is
forged.

The impugned order dated 25.07.2026 is, therefore, quashed and the
writ petition is allowed.

In view of the foregoing, the matter is remitted to respondent no. 3,
District Basic Education Officer, Aligarh, who shall reconsider the
claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds,
treating the petitioner as the legal heir and dependent of the deceased
employee, strictly in accordance with law. The claim shall be
considered afresh and decided by means of a reasoned and speaking
order, preferably within a period of one month from the date of
production of a certified copy of this order.

It is, however, made clear that the aforesaid consideration shall
remain subject to fulfilment of all other requisite statutory conditions
and qualifications governing compassionate appointment. In case
there exists no other legal impediment, the consequential
appointment shall be considered in accordance with the applicable
rules and the decision so taken shall be communicated to the
petitioner forthwith.

(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
October 1, 2026
Rahul.

Digitally signed by :-
RAHUL GOSWAMI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…