Allahabad High Court
KUMAR PRASANT SRIVASTAVAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The court disposed of the writ petition but directed the respondent to decide the petitioner's representation for compassionate appointment within twelve weeks, subject to hearing the heirs.
Summary
Petitioner Kumar Prasant Srivastava applied for a compassionate appointment under the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 after his father's death on 19‑02‑2026. He filed a representation on 13‑04‑2026, which remained pending. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus, while the standing counsel argued the petition was redundant as the representation was already before respondent No.3. The High Court disposed of the writ petition, directing respondent No.3 to decide the representation expeditiously, preferably within twelve weeks, after hearing all heirs, unless a legal impediment exists. The order was signed by Justice Manish Kumar Nigam on 23‑09‑2026.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable when a representation for compassionate appointment is pending before the respondent.
- Whether the court can direct the respondent to decide the representation within a specified time frame.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- compassionate appointment
- dependent recruitment
- Uttar Pradesh
- writ petition
- administrative law
- representation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 14868 of 2026
Kumar Prasant Srivastava
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 7 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Badal Khan, Mohd. Shahanshah Khan
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that father of the
petitioner died on 19.2.2026 and thereafter, petitioner has claimed
compassionate appointment under the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of
Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974.
Representation was submitted by the petitioner on 13.4.2026 and
representation of the petitioner has not been decided till date nor appointment
has been offered to the petitioner.
2. Learned Standing Counsel has submitted that since the petitioner has
already approached respondent no.3, no useful purpose would be served in
keeping this writ petition pending.
3. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to
respondent no.3 to consider and decide the representation of petitioner for
compassionate appointment, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably,
within twelve weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this
order after providing opportunity of hearing to all the heirs of deceased
employee, provided there is no other legal impediment.
September 23, 2026
Rishabh
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
RISHABH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…