ANIL KUMAR CHANDRAVANSHI Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has prayed for compassionate appointment. Petitioner's father was in service of the respondents. He died on 29-1-1979. By now 26 years have passed. Petitioner has filed application for compassionate appointment. The prayer has been rejected as per order (P/l) dt. 12-1-2004. Earlier appointment was sought for 'son-in-law' of the deceased by the widow of the deceased, he was appointed on compassionate basis in the year 1994. Prayer made by petitioner has been disallowed as per order (P/l) on the ground that as father has died in the year 1979, it is not possible to give appointment now and one incumbent ie. son-in-law has already been appointed in the year 1994 on compassionate basis as prayed by widow of deceased.

(2.) IN my opinion, there is no merit in the petition as father of petitioner has died in the year 1979 and son-in-law was appointed. It has been laid down by the Apex Court in National Hydroelectric Power Corporation and another Vs. Nanak Chand and another, 2004 AIR SCW 6339, that after lapse of reasonable time such as 10 years, no appointment can be offered, ordered to be considered as time is the material factor in such cases. The Apex Court has laid down thus :-

(3.) OTHER decisions have also been referred by this Court in W. P. No. 2829/2003 (Nitin Sen Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and Anr.), decided on 10-12-2003 thus :-