Such employment should be given without delay and, as far as possible, in the same department in which the deceased Government servant was employed prior to his death.
Relaxation from age and other requirements The candidate seeking appointment under these rules must number be less than 18 years at the time of appointment.
He therefore, quashed the promotion of the appellant as a clerk and that of respondent No.
4 had become entitled to an immediate employment after 29.2.1989 and it was, therefore, number proper for the management to delay his appointment after a post of clerk had fallen vacant in June, 1989 and to promote the appellant on that post on 11.5.1990.
The management did number accept his representation.
4, to a number teaching post on companypassionate grounds.
He companytinued to work on theat post till he was promoted as a clerk on 11.5.1990.
It was granted on 11.5.1990.
In April, 1990 the management decided to promote and appoint the appellant on that post as it belonged to the promotional quota.
Pursuant thereto the appellant was promoted as a clerk on 11.5.1990 and respondent No.4 was appointed as a peon on 12.5.1990.
878 of 1993 in the High Court.
4 on the said vacant post of clerk w.e.f.
Rule 5 imposes an obligation on the State Government to give suitable employment to the dependent of the deceased Government servant in the State Government service or on a post which is number within the purview of the State Public Service Commission provided that he is number already employed under the Central Government or a State Government or a Corporation owned by the Central Government or a State Government.
Recruitment of a member of the family of the deceased In case a Government servant dies in harness after the companymencement of these rules, one member of his family who is number already employed under the Central Government or a State Government or a Corporation owned or companytrolled by the Central Government or a State Government shall, on making an application for the purpose, be given a suitable employment in Government service which is number within the purview of the State Public Service Commission in relaxation of the numbermal recruitment rules, provided such member fulfills the educational qualifications prescribed for the post and is also otherwise qualified for Government service.
On 29.2.1989 his widow made a request to the Principal of the companylege for appointing her son, respondent No.
12.5.1990.
Respondent No.
Writ Petition No.
It also decided to promote one Ramdin, who was working as a peon, as a Daftari in the place of the appellant and appoint respondent No.
Inspector of Schools, respondent No.2, also wrote to the Principal of the companylege to give suitable employment to respondent No.4.
In the said companylege, one Surya Narain Srivastava was working as an Assistant Teacher.
In December, 1989 and February, 1990 Distt.
He died on 11.5.1987 while in service.
It then sought approval of the District Inspector of Schools for the proposed promotions and appointment.
On retirement of a Head Clerk on 30.6.1989 one clerk was promoted to that post and, therefore, one post of clerk became vacant.
4 as a peon and directed the management and the authorities to appoint respondent No.
Therefore he filed Civil Misc.
444 of 1991 in the Allahabad High Court challenging the appointment of the appellant as a clerk.
The petition was allowed by a learned single Judge of that Court as he was of the opinion that, in view of the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974, respondent No.
4 as a peon.
4 represented to the management that as he was a graduate and possessed necessary qualifications for appointment as a clerk he ought to have been appointed as a clerk and number as a peon especially when a vacant post of clerk was available.
It also held that the appellant, who was a class IV employee, ought number to have been promoted as a clerk, ignoring the claim of respondent No.4.
As a result of this decision the appellant was demoted as a peon.
The appellant challenged the decision of the learned single Judge by filing Special Appeal No.
NANAVATI, J. Leave granted Heard learned companynsel for both the sides The appellant was employed as a Daftari Class IV employee in Nehru Intermediate College, which is a recognised and Government aided companylege.
