Smt. Sushma Devi vs Union of India (UOI) and Others

B.S. Verma, J.—Heard Ms. Sanjana Madan, Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. V.B.S. Negi, Asstt. Solicitor General for the Respondents.

By means of this writ petition, the Petitioner has sought following relief:

i) To Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to give compassionate appointment to the Petitioner in place of her late husband.

ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to release the family pension to the Petitioner along with other post retirement benefits and also award interest @ 18% on the arrears of the post retirement dues.

iii) to issue any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

iii) to award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the Petitioner.

The grievance of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner has made several representations for her appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules but till date no decision has been taken on the same by Respondent No. 3.

During the course of arguments, learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that representation, made by the Petitioner is still pending and therefore she prays that Respondent No. 3 may be directed to take decision on the same.

The prayer made is innocuous.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of finally directing the Superintendent of Post Offices, Pauri Division, Pauri (Respondent No. 3), to take decision on the representation of the Petitioner for her appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules, in accordance with law by a reasoned and speaking order, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

Interim Relief Application No. 9659 of 2010 stands disposed of accordingly.