ANIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:-

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the aforementioned prayer has submitted that the impugned order, passed pursuant to the decision of the District Compassionate Appointment Committee, Muzaffarpur rejecting the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground, is wholly arbitrary and illegal, inasmuch as, mere employment of the brother of the petitioner in Government service could not have been held to be a disqualification for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the documents enclosed with the writ application to show that the brother of the petitioner was already separate in mess and business prior to the death of the father of the petitioner, the deceased employee and as such the reason given by the District Compassionate Appointment Committee, Muzaffarpur for rejecting the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground is factually incorrect and legally unsustainable. Reliance in this regard has also been placed by him on a judgment of this Court in the case of Santosh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & Ors., 2013 1 PLJR 454.