(1.) ORDERS dated 30-08-2007 and 12-09-2007 are being assailed vide this writ petition. By order dated 30-08-2007 (Annexure-P/5) claim of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment has been declined on the ground that adopted son is not entitled for appointment on compassionate ground. The said order is reiterated by the second order dated 12-09-2007(Annexure-P/6). Mukundi Lal Rohitash employed as Farras in the Office of Principal, Sahodra Rai Govt. Mahila Polytechnic College, Sagar, died on 19-11-2005. Claiming himself to be adopted son being adopted on 20-04-1992, petitioner filed an application seeking appointment on compassionate ground. The claim of the petitioner was rejected by the impugned orders on the basis of the policy in vogue i.e. policy No. lh-3-7-2000/,d, dated 22-01-2007. Contention of the petitioner is that his case ought to have been considered on the basis of the policy which was in vogue when Mukundi Lal Rohitas expired on 19-11-2005. The contention of the petitioner has to be rejected outright in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in Bank of Maharashtra and another v. Manoj Kumar Deharia and another : 2010 ILR 213, wherein it is held :-
(2.) IN view whereof no relief can be granted to the petitioner as being an adopted son, as per the policy, in existence on the date of consideration he was not entitled for appointment on compassionate ground. The petition fails and is hereby dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.