MITHILESH KUMAR PANDEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State.

(2.) The present writ application has been filed for quashing the order issued under Memo No.251 dtd. 17/2/2012 passed by the respondent No.3 by which the respondent No.3 has rejected the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground for the reason that the petitioner has not furnished the affidavit as required vide Annexure-3 by which the petitioner is required to submit some affidavit with respect to the none of the family members of the petitioner is in service and petitioner has not filed the same within the stipulated period then the respondent No.3 has made an enquiry and after receiving the report of the enquiry it was found that the elder brother of the petitioner was in service and on that ground the candidature of the petitioner was rejected and despite of repeated request, the petitioner has not furnished the certificate of source of income of his elder brother. The father of the petitioner was Government Servant posted as Revenue Employee, Maharajganj and while he was in service he died on 23/9/2010 leaving behind his wife, two sons and one daughter.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the elder brother of the petitioner, namely, Sri Akhilesh Kumar Pandey was living separately with his family and he has not looked after the family members of the petitioner and in the year 2010 the petitioner has applied for his appointment on compassionate ground and the District Appointment Committee vide his meeting dtd. 25/5/2011 considered by the District Level Committee for compassionate appointment and the respondent No.3 has issued a letter to the petitioner to joint the duty within 15 days with certain conditions and accordingly the petitioner has joined in the office of the Circle Office, Maharajganj on 1/7/2011. All of a sudden, the petitioner has received a show cause notice on 30/1/2012 issued under the signature of the respondent No.3 directing the petitioner to submit explanation within three days as to why your service has not been terminated for not disclosing the facts. Pursuant to that show cause notice, the petitioner has submitted his reply and respondent No.3 after considering the explanation given by the petitioner has passed the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.3 without considering the fact that elder brother of the petitioner is living separately during lifetime of his father.