RAHUL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 14/1/2021, whereby and whereunder the case of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground of being time barred inasmuch as he had filed application for compassionate appointment belatedly only on 16/12/2020. The petitioner has further prayed to direct the respondent-authorities to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground.

(2.) The present case has a chequered history inasmuch as the father of the petitioner had joined as Chaukidar on 15/6/1979 with the respondentDepartment and he is stated to have died in harness on 24/9/2003. The mother of the petitioner had then applied for grant of compassionate employment and had also requested the respondents to pay the retiral dues and other benefits of her husband, however, when she failed to receive any solace from the respondents, she had filed a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 1106 of 2005, whereafter she had also filed a contempt petition bearing MJC No. 877 of 2009, alleging non-compliance of the order passed in the said writ petition, whereupon, the Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Bihar, Patna had rejected the claim of the mother of the petitioner, vide order dtd. 28/4/2009, purportedly raising the issue regarding the validity of the appointment of the husband of the mother of the petitioner. The said order dtd. 28/4/2009 was challenged by the mother of the petitioner before this Court by filing a writ petition bearing CWJC No. 9681 of 2013, which was allowed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dtd. 29/8/2016. The Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna was directed to look into the grievances of the petitioner and consider the case of the husband of the mother of the petitioner in terms of paragraph no. 53 of the judgment rendered in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others vs. Uma Devi(3) and others; reported in (2006)4 SCC 1. The respondents had then considered the case of the mother of the petitioner and vide order dtd. 29/11/2017, issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government, Building Construction Department, the services of the husband of the petitioner was regularized in the Regular Establishment with effect from 22/10/1984 and it was directed that pension be paid to the mother of the petitioner.

(3.) It appears that the petitioner had then filed an application for grant of compassionate employment on 16/12/2020, however, the same has been rejected by the impugned order dtd. 14/1/2021, passed by the Superintending Engineer, Building Circle, Bhagalpur on the ground that the same is time barred.