(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS writ application is directed against that part of order dated 16.6.2003, as contained in Annexure 4C, whereby and whereunder the claim of the petitioner for his appointment on compassionate ground has been rejected.
(3.) ACCORDING to the case of the respondents, as disclosed in the counter affidavit, the father of the petitioner was initially engaged as tube -well operator under the respondents on 1.5.1971 and since he has worked for some time, he was regularised with effect from 5.1.1981 in the Work Charged Establishment itself in consonance with Note 3 to Rule 59 of the P.W.D. Code, and, as such, the petitioner does not come within the definition of a Government servant under the Rules framed by the State Government for appointment on compassionate ground.