HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 117 of 2008 (S/S) Jitender Kumar and another. … Petitioners. Versus Commissioner, Trade Tax. … Respondent Mr. Gajendra Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Gopal Narayan, Brief Holder for the State/respondent. Dated: June 9,2009: Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. With the consent of parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. 3. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to provide appointment to the petitioner no.1 on compassionate ground under Dying-in-Harness Rules. It is further prayed that the respondent may be directed to make payment of suppertime pay scale as were due and payable to Rishipal Singh- (deceased i.e. father of petitioner no.1 and husband of petitioner no.2) and also to pay arrears of pensionary and other benefits for which the petitioners are entitled. 4. During the course of arguments learned counsel for the petitioners drew attention of this Court to the communication dated 19th January 2009 written by Deputy Commissioner I, Trade Tax, Dehradun by which the petitioner no.2 (wife of the deceased) was informed that since her son (petitioner no.1) has filed writ petition no. 177(S/S)2008 before the Uttarakhand High Court, no action can be taken on her representation for appointment of her son under Dying-in-Harness Rules and for payment of pensionary benefits. 2 5. According to the learned counsel for petitioners now the respondents are declining the claim of petitioner no.1 for appointment on compassionate ground under Dying- in-Harness Rules on the ground pendency of present writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that the writ petition may be disposed of directing the respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner no.1 for appointment on compassionate ground under Dying-in- Harness Rules within a stipulated period as prescribed by this Court. 6. Mr. Gopal Narayan, Brief Holder for the State does not have any objection in case directions is issued to the respondent for consideration of the case of petitioner no.1 for his appointment on compassionate ground under Dying-in-Harness Rules. 7. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the respondent is directed to consider the claim of petitioner no.1 for appointment on compassionate ground under Dying-in- Harness Rules within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 8. The petitioner is also permitted to move a fresh representation regarding payment of post retirement dues of Rishipal Singh (deceased) and other dues which are admissible to the petitioners. In case such representation is moved, the respondent will also consider the claim of the petitioners and take decision on the representation of the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representation alongwith a certified copy of this order. 9. With these directions the writ petition is finally disposed of. No order as to costs. (V.K. Bist, J.) 09.06.2009 NCM: