SUMITRA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) AFTER the Government employee died, while in service, the petitioner being the wife of the deceased Government employee applied for giving a compassionate appointment to the son of the deceased. The application has not yet been decided one way or the other. It appears that the application was made within the time and in the prescribed proforma. There was no just reason not to decide the merit of that application. However, it appears that the application could not be decided inasmuch as the District Magistrate, being the Chairman of the Compassionate Appointment Committee of the district, received a letter purporting to be of one Suman Kumar Shrivastava wherein it was stated that the age of the son of the deceased, for whom the application for compassionate had been made, is only 11 years and that in the application a false statement has been made to the effect that he is a major and, accordingly, competent to offer himself for compassionate appointment. It is, however, surprising that without verifying the contents of the said letter and at the same time without doubting the genuineness of the School Leaving Certificate issued in favour of the son of petitioner by a Government school stating therein that the son of petitioner was born on 11.3.1980, a first information report was lodged at the instance of the District Magistrate. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, thereupon directed constitution of a Medical Board and in terms thereof a Medical Board was constituted comprising of Government doctors. They examined the son of petitioner on 28.9.2001 and opined as on that date the son of petitioner was 22/23 years old.

(3.) THERE shall be no order as to costs.