Allahabad High Court
ARUN KUMAR @ RINKUversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKRAM D CHAUHAN
Holding
The Court did not grant mandamus but ordered the petitioner to complete required formalities and directed the respondent to decide the compassionate appointment within two months.
Summary
The petitioner, Arun Kumar, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the authorities to summon his service record and to appoint him under the Dying‑in‑Harness Rules, 1974, for a compassionate appointment. He alleged that an order dated 24‑08‑2015 requiring him to produce documents had not been served on him, and his claim for compassionate appointment was pending. The respondents contended that the application would be decided in a time‑bound manner. The Court held that the petitioner should complete any formalities required by the respondents and directed the third respondent to pass a decision on the compassionate appointment within two months of the certified copy of the order. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed without granting the relief of mandamus.
Issues considered
- Whether the Court can issue a mandamus directing the authority to summon the petitioner’s service record and appoint him under the Dying‑in‑Harness Rules, 1974.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a time‑bound decision on his application for compassionate appointment.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- compassionate appointment
- mandamus
- writ petition
- Dying‑in‑Harness Rules
- administrative law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 39163 of 2015
Arun Kumar @ Rinku
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Archana Hans, Kanhaiya Lal, Rajesh
Yadav, Satyendra Kumar
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Archana Singh, C.S.C.
Court No. - 34
HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.
2. The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:
"(a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
the respondents authority to summon the record of petitioner and further
direct to respondents to make the appointment of petitioner under Dying-
in-Harness Rules 1974.
(b) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing
the respondents authority to decide the representation of petitioner for
compassionate appointment within specific period."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the claim of the
petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment is pending
consideration before respondent. He has referred to an order dated
24.8.2015 whereby some documents have been asked from the petitioner,
although the aforesaid order was never served on the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the order on the
application of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment
would be passed in a time bound manner.
5. In view of the aforesaid, the petitioner, if required may complete the
formalities as required by the respondents and the respondent no.3 shall
pass appropriate orders on the application for compassionate appointment
WRIA No. 39163 of 2015
2
of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of
production of a certified copy of this order.
6. The writ petition stands disposed of.
(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)
March 18, 2026
Bhaskar
Digitally signed by :-
BHASKAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…