GANGIA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The maternal grand father of the petitioner no. 2 and the husband of petitioner no. 1 died on 8th October, 2004 in harness while working as a Chaukidar. Petitioners, thus, applied for a compassionate appointment to be given to the petitioner no. 2. This application has been rejected by the impugned order dated 21st July, 2004 being Annexure-3 to the writ petition only on the ground that compassionate appointment is not available to a grand son. The petitioner has relied upon a decision of the Government dated 20th December, 1995 which is Annexure-5 to the writ petition. By that decision of the Government dated 20th December, 1995, in relation to Chaukidars and Dafadars the policy of the Government for giving compassionate appointments dated 23rd May, 1991 was put to rest and instead by that decision dated 20th December, 1995 a new policy for giving compassionate appointments to Chaukidars and Dafadars have been laid down. A look at the said decision would show that thereby compassionate appointment were also made available to a deceased Chaukidar and Dafadar who has died in harness to his maternal grand son in addition to wife, son daughter etc.

(2.) I permitted the respondents to file a counter affidavit on 22nd March, 2005 and, accordingly, adjourned the matter but no such affidavit has been filed.

(3.) I think, having regard to the fact that there exists such a decision of the Government dated 20th December, 1995 and, accordingly, the District Compassionate Appointment Committee is to consider whether in terms of that decision the petitioner no. 2 is entitled to an appointment on compassionate ground. Accordingly, I remit the matter back to the District Compassionate Appointment Committee, Gaya for reconsideration of the case of the petitioner and particularly, in the light of the Government's decision dated 20th December, 1995, being Annexure-5 to the writ petition with a further direction upon the said Committee to communicate to the petitioners in writing within twelve weeks of the service of a copy of this order whether on the basis of the said decision of the Government the petitioners are entitled to have the claim of the petitioner no. 2 for being appointed on compassionate greund for his maternal grand father has died in harness is considerable or not and if not, why not. In the event it is held that the said claim is considerable the committee shall consider the claim of the petitioner and deal with the same in accordance with law and on the merits of the claim as quickly as possible but not later than four weeks from the date of such decision. This disposes of the writ petition.