JUDGMENT : Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. 1. The sole petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the following prayer:- A. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari as to quash the order dated 17.09.2013 (Annexure No-1) passed by the respondent no. 3 to this writ petition. B. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari as to quash the chargesheet dated 18.09.2013 (Annexure No. 9A) filed by the respondent no. 3 against the petitioner and further disciplinary proceedings. C. Direct the respondents to issue the salary of the petitioner forthwith. D. Issue any other writ order or direction which this Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. E. Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner. 2. The fact of the matter, as per the petitioner, is that the petitioner was an Assistant Lecturer (Mechanical Engineering) in K.L. Polytechnic, Roorkee District-Haridwar. The petitioner went to leave on 14.03.2013 and thereafter only reported on 16.09.2013 i.e. after six months! He gave certain medical certificates as well. He was given joining in the college but thereafter the Principal vide letter dated 17.09.2013 returned the entire medical certificates and asked the petitioner that he should get them certified by the Board concerned and let the same be submitted thereafter. Since the petitioner was later not given joining and other benefits, hence he preferred the present writ petition. 3. Before going further in the matter, it is pertinent to mention here that during the pendency of the present writ petition the petitioner – Naveen Kumar passed away on 21.01.2015. Presently his widow and daughter, namely, Smt. Poonam Aggarwal and Km. Nikita Aggarwal have been substituted as petitioner Nos. 1/1 and 1/2 respectively in the writ petition, in place of petitioner – Naveen Kumar. 4. The claim of the petitioner now before this Court is that, as the petitioner (husband of petitioner No. 1/1) was never treated to be in service though he died while in harness. Moreover, she never received any pension (as her husband was working on pensionable post) as well as salary and other retirement benefits as well. Furthermore, the claim for appointment on compassionate ground has not been considered by the authority concerned. 5. Heard Mr. Manoj Tiwari, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Alok Mehra, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Moreover, she never received any pension (as her husband was working on pensionable post) as well as salary and other retirement benefits as well. Furthermore, the claim for appointment on compassionate ground has not been considered by the authority concerned. 5. Heard Mr. Manoj Tiwari, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Alok Mehra, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Siddhartha Sah, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the records. 6. In the present case counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents/Management of School wherein it has been stated that the certificates of the petitioner (Naveen Kumar) were not denied. However, he was only asked to get it authenticated by the authority concerned and meanwhile on an enquiry it was found that the petitioner was also implicated as an accused in a case under Section 138 N.I. Act wherein, as per the information, he also remained in police custody for one day. Meanwhile, a disciplinary proceeding was also initiated against the present petitioner for his long absence. In fact, this fact is stated himself by the petitioner in the writ petition, as one of the prayers is for quashing of the chargesheet. 7. No fruitful purpose will be solved by going into the details at this stage, since the petitioner – Naveen Kumar died on 21.01.2015 against whom the entire proceedings (including disciplinary proceedings) have been initiated. All this Court has to examine as to whether the petitioner was validly given joining on 16.09.2013 or not. The petitioner has made a categorical clarification to this effect that he gave joining on 16.09.2013 along with all medical certificates, the relevant paragraph reads as under:- “That on 16.09.2013 the petitioner reported to the principal and joined his duties only after submitting all medical certificates and fitness certificate with joining report. The copy of the joining report dated 16.09.2013 duly received by the respondent no. 2 and copy of medical certificates and fitness certificate is also being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure No. 4 to this petition.” 8. This has not been specifically denied by the respondents in its counter affidavit. The copy of the joining report dated 16.09.2013 duly received by the respondent no. 2 and copy of medical certificates and fitness certificate is also being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure No. 4 to this petition.” 8. This has not been specifically denied by the respondents in its counter affidavit. In fact by the conduct of the respondents it is clear that even after a long absence of the petitioner they had given a formal joining to the petitioner, his medical certificates were returned to him and he was not allowed to function further as a teacher in the college, though initially, he was given a valid joining. There is still a master-servant relation between the parties which is still survives, irrespective of the fact that the disciplinary proceedings was going on against the petitioner. Even there was no formal suspension against the petitioner in any case survives and it was during the survival of the master-servant relationship that the death occurred. Therefore, the petitioner has to be treated as an employee of the college, as this has to be called a death in harness. 9. In view thereof, the petitioner (Naveen Kumar) shall be treated to be died during harness. The remaining petitioners (i.e. family of the deceased – Naveen Kumar) shall be liable to be given all the benefits, including salary, pension etc., which shall be considered by the respondents as expeditiously as possible. 10. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed.