Skip to content


Rameshwar Prasad Vs. U.O.i. and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectService
CourtRajasthan High Court
Decided On
Case NumberS.B. Civil Writ No. 1601 of 1969
Judge
Reported in1974WLN(UC)162
AppellantRameshwar Prasad
RespondentU.O.i. and ors.
DispositionPetition dismissed
Cases ReferredGul Mohammed v. Union of India
Excerpt:
.....of juvenile justice rule, 2007 - as such, accused has to be treated as juvenile under the said act. - government advocate has opposed the application for substitution submitted by krishan dutt on the ground that the employment of shri rameshwar prasad was a matter of status and not of contract & was enjoyed by him as a person all right and did not enjure for the benefit of his legal representative......as application for substitution of his name as petitioner in the writ petition in place of shri rameshwar prasad.2. the learned dy.government advocate has opposed the application for substitution submitted by krishan dutt on the ground that the employment of shri rameshwar prasad was a matter of status and not of contract & was enjoyed by him as a person all right and did not enjure for the benefit of his legal representative. the submission of the dy. government advocate is that on account of the death of the petitioner rameshwar prasad, the cause of action did not survive and as such the application for substitution is not maintainable.3. i have heard the learned counsel for the parties in gul mohammed v. union of india 1973 rlw 14 an identical matter arose for consideration.....
Judgment:

D.P. Gupta, J.

1. This writ petition had been filed by Rameshwar Prasad, who was holding the post of Assistant Post Master at Ganganagar, challenging the order of Post Master General, Jaipur, dated 22.8.69, by which the petitioner was retired from service with effect from 15.11.69, Rameshwar Prasad petitioner died on 13th March, 1971, and on 5th July, 1971, his minor son Krishan Dutt, through his next friend Shri Jagdeo Sharma, submitted as application for substitution of his name as petitioner in the writ petition in place of Shri Rameshwar Prasad.

2. The learned Dy.Government Advocate has opposed the application for substitution submitted by Krishan Dutt on the ground that the employment of Shri Rameshwar Prasad was a matter of status and not of contract & was enjoyed by him as a person all right and did not enjure for the benefit of his legal representative. the submission of the Dy. Government Advocate is that on account of the death of the petitioner Rameshwar Prasad, the cause of action did not survive and as such the application for substitution is not maintainable.

3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties in Gul Mohammed v. Union of India 1973 RLW 14 an identical matter arose for consideration and this Court held that the employment under the Union of India was a matter of status and not of contract, the legal representatives of the petitioner were not entitled to maintain the writ petition. I agree with the view taken in Gill Mohammad's case 1973 RLW 14 and hold that the right to sue in respect of the relief claimed in the present writ petition did not survive to the legal representative of Rameshwar Prasad, petitioner. The application or substitution submitted by his son, is, therefore, not maintainable and is dismissed as such.

4. As the petitioner Shri Rameshwar Prasad has died and the right to sue does not survive to his legal representative, the writ petition is also dismissed. There will, however, be no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //