Allahabad High Court

PIYUSH GAUTAMversusUNION OF INDIA AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 8 September 2026
Bench: DINESH PATHAK

Holding

The Court disposed of the writ petition without adjudicating the merits, directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the General Manager within three weeks.

Summary

The petitioner, Piyush Gautam, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Union of India and other respondents to appoint him on compassionate grounds under the 1998-2003 scheme, following the death of his father, a Branch Manager, in service on 9 June 2021. He alleged that despite repeated representations, his application for compassionate appointment dated 1 August 2023 had not been considered. The respondents argued that the grievance should be addressed by the General Manager, who is the appropriate authority, and they raised no objection to the court ordering a fresh representation to be filed. The Court held that there was no merit in keeping the petition pending and disposed of it without addressing the substantive claim, directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the General Manager within three weeks and for the authority to decide it within three months. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, leaving the petitioner to pursue his claim through the prescribed administrative channel.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court should issue a mandamus directing appointment on compassionate grounds under the scheme.
Whether the petition is maintainable or should be referred to the appropriate administrative authority.
Whether the petitioner should be directed to file a fresh representation before the General Manager for redressal.

Subjects

compassionate appointment
mandamus
writ petition
administrative grievance
High Court of Allahabad
public service employment

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - A No. - 14127 of 2026

Piyush Gautam
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kameshwar Rao
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Jainendra Kumar Mishra

Court No. - 32
HON'BLE DINESH PATHAK, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel
representing State-respondents and perused the record on board.

2. This writ petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking the following reliefs:

"(I) A writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding
and directing to the respondent authorities to provide appointment to the
petitioner on compassionate ground under the scheme for compassionate
appointment 1998 amended up to 2003 as dependent of deceased
employee i.e. Father of the petitioner.

(II) A writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding
and directing to the respondent no.3 to consider the application moved by
the petitioner dated 1-8-2023 for his appointment on compassionate
ground and take an appropriate decision upon the application dated 01-
08-2023 as moved by the petitioner expeditiously within stipulated period
as fixed by this Hon'ble Court."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's father died
in harness on 09.06.2021 while serving as Branch Manger. Despite repeated
representations moved by the petitioner, his claim for appointment on
compassionate grounds has not yet been considered.

4. Jainendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents
No. 2 to 4 has contended that the grievance of the present petitioner
regarding appointment on compassionate grounds can be more appropriately
redressed by the General Manager (respondent No. 2), and he has no
objection, in case, a direction is issued for expeditious disposal of a fresh
representation to be moved by the petitioner within such stipulated period as
WRIA No. 14127 of 2026
2

may be directed by this Court.

5. In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served by
keeping this matter pending. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to
finally dispose of the present writ petition, without making any observation
on the merits of the case, with liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh
representation before the General Manager (respondent No. 2), to ventilate
his grievance, as averred in the present writ petition, within a period of three
weeks from today, along with a certified copy of this order and a self
attested copy of the present writ petition, and, in turn, he shall consider and
decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a
period of three months from the date of production of such representation.

6. With the aforesaid observation, present writ petition is disposed of.

September 9, 2026
vinay
(Dinesh Pathak,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
VINAY KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…