(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 12.1.2004 (Annexure -7) issued by the Commandant, Bihar Home Guard Division, respondent No. 2, by which the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground has been rejected. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has sought to raise the plea that the husband of the petitioner was an employee of the State Government and, accordingly, the provisions of the relevant Circular of the State Government in this regard would apply and she would be entitled to appointment on compassionate ground. However, it is rightly stated in the counter affidavit itself that the Home Guards being a voluntary organization, the husband of the petitioner was a mere volunteer to the same and not a permanent confirmed employee of the State Government and the Circular of the State Government cannot, therefore, apply in the case of the petitioner.
(3.) IN the impugned order the ground of dismissal is that the Govt. Circular, which applies to appointment on compassionate ground of one of the dependents of a deceased person, only relates to a case where such a person is killed in the course of extremist violence. It is pointed out therein that the husband of the petitioner had met his death on account of being run over by a train on 19.4.2004 while he was proceeding to join his duties in connection with General Election of Lok Sabha in 2004 and, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of the said Circular.