NEEL KAMAL PRAKASH SINHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE proceedings are being dragged unnecessarily. The issue plainly is whether the petitioner - appellant Neel Kamal Prakash Sinha is entitled to be considered to receive an appointment, as a compassionate appointment, on the death of his mother, who was a Gram Sevika with the Central Bihar State Social Welfare Advisory Board. There is no issue that this Board partakes the nature of a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. It is structured with State funds. Unfortunately, though appearance has been filed on behalf of the Board by a counsel, the latter does not appear.

(2.) THIS small matter has generated four cases, two writ petitions and two Letters Patent Appeals. The first writ petition was C.W.J.C. No. 12973 of 2002; Neel Kamal Prakash Sinha v. State of Bihar and others. The petitioner was unsuited on the ground that his father was an agriculturist and in the circumstances had sufficient means of livelihood and was supported by the father and, in effect, the death of his mother was of no consequence so as to be considered for being given an appointment as a compassionate appointment. This order on the writ petition is dated 20 December, 2002 was challenged in Letters Patent Appeal No. 82 of 2003. This appeal was permitted to be withdrawn.

(3.) LEARNED counsel virtually submits that there is an error on record that the petitioner was unsuited on the ground of counsel's statement that his father was an agriculturist. Learned counsel submits that the order records that it had been stated on an enquiry from counsel. Court's attention is drawn to an aspect on record that the Circle Officer, Sadar Patna has certified that the petitioner -appellant's father is 'Bhumihin' (landless). Learned counsel submits that his father is not an agriculturist but a mere landless labourer. Learned counsel submits that the matter be judged accordingly. In the circumstances, what remains is that his mother was a public servent. She died, he had applied to receive an appointment as a compassionate appointment. Learned counsel also points out to the record that earlier the same Board had made appointments in similar circumstances and these are matters of record. This is submitted in paragraph 4 of the supplementary affidavit to which no denial has been made nor counsel for the Board appears in this matter.