Factual Matrix 

In the Matter at hand Neelam Devi v. State of U.P a petition contesting the General Manager Administration of the Bank’s decision to deny a daughter’s request for a compassionate appointment since only unmarried daughters are qualified for such a position. In the current instance, the petitioner’s father worked for the Bank as an assistant branch accountant. He tragically passed away while working, and as his daughter, the petitioner applied for a compassionate appointment. Because she is the married daughter of the dead employee, the compassionate appointment has been rejected. In accordance with the rules of Regulation 104 of the Regulations, 1975, only the unmarried daughter is qualified for a compassionate appointment; the married daughter is not. Additionally, the petitioner requested the issuance of an appropriate injunction to invalidate the phrase unmarried in Regulation 104 of the Regulations of 1975.

Observation of the Court 

The phrase unmarried in the note added to Regulation 104 of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Employees’ Service Regulations, 1975, was invalidated by the Allahabad High Court division bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Om Prakash Shukla, who also annulled the contested ruling.

The Court noted that the State Government rejected the Institutional Service Board’s proposal to change Regulation 104 of the Regulations of 1975 during the writ petition. In accordance with Section 122 of the 1965 Act, the Board’s regulations control the terms of employment for cooperative society employees in Uttar Pradesh. The recruitment of the wife and husband, sons, and unmarried or widowed daughters of dead employees is permitted under Regulation 104 of the Regulations of 1975. The court further pointed out that the U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974, which were created in accordance with Article 309 of the Indian Constitution, set forth the legal requirements for compassionate recruitment for State Government workers.

The Court concluded that the State Government could not reasonably reject the suggestion made by the Institutional Service Board to change the note added to Regulation 104 of the Regulations 1975. As a result, while granting the petition, the court ordered that after two months of the date a certified copy of this ruling is produced, the petitioner’s claim for a compassionate appointment be treated as qualified for one

CASE NAME – Neelam Devi v. State of U.P., Writ A No. 18566 of 2021