IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 704 (M/B) of 2006 Chini Mill Mazdoor Sabha, Distt. U.S. Nagar, Having its H.O. at Subhash Nagar, Bazpur Through its General Secretary Sri Bhagwant Singh Shoshodia, aged about 56 years …. Petitioner Vs 1. The State of Uttaranchal through its Secretary Ganna/Chinni 2. General Manager, Sehkari Chini Mill, Bazpur 3. Administrator/ Commissioner Kumaon Mandal, Nainital …..Respondents Sri A. Rab, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri C.K. Sharma & Sri Rajeev Mohan, Id. counsel for the respondents. Dated: August 02, 2006 Coram: Hon’ble P.C.Verma,J Hon’ble B.S. Verma,J By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for writ of certiorari quashing the impugned circular dated 17.1.2006 (Annexure No.3) issued by Respondent No.1 by which the dependents of the deceased workers under dying in harness in the sugar mills of the State of Uttaranchal have been categorized. 2. In category-(a) of the said circular, those dependents have been classified whose parents have died at the time of service on account of some accident or otherwise and it is stated that category (a) dependents will be given first priority. In category (b), those dependents have been classified who are the dependatns of employees of mills who have died in harness as a result of natural death and the service of such employee was satisfactory. In category-(c), the dependants of those deceased have been classified who died on account of suicide, bad habits or personal rivalries or on account of some enmity and during the course of fighting if the employee is died, the dependents of such deceased will not be treated to be dependent of employee died in harness. Thus, this category has been excluded from the benefit of employee under the dying in harness Rule. 3. This clause has been challenged by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that for the fault of father, the son should not be made to suffer. The further challenge is that the Administrator could not issue such circular, as he is not competent to do so on behalf of the State Government. 4. So far as first challenge is concerned, the clause (c ) category has rightly been excluded from the category of dependents died in harness as death occurred due to his own act for which he himself was responsible. It is settled law that the appointment in dying in harness rules cannot be claimed as a matter of right. It is an appointment to provide sustenance to the family of the deceased. If the conduct of the deceased was so bad which resulted in his death, such compassionate treatment is not required to be given. Therefore, we uphold the clause (c ) of the aforesaid circular. 5. In so far as the challenge with regard to the competence of the authority is concerned, the Administrator of the Apex Cooperative Societies i.e. Uttaranchal Sahkari Chini Mills Sangh has issued a circular who exercises all the powers of the Committee of Management of the Cooperative Societies and he can lay down the guidelines as well as can explain the byelaws relating to the cooperative societies which is framed by the society. The impugned circular is nothing but a clarification of the byelaws. Therefore, the Administrator being exercising the powers of Committee of Management, was competent to issue the circular. 6. For the reasons recorded above, the writ petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed as such. No order as to costs. (B.S. Verma, J.) (P.C. Verma, J.) Rajeev Dang