KRISHNA KUMAR MUNDRA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been preferred for getting compassionate appointment because of the death of father of the present petitioner which has taken place on 21st April, 1988.

(2.) I have heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner who has mainly submitted that the lather of the petitioner has expired on 21st April, 1988. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a representation in the Year, 1991 for his appointment on compassionate ground when he was still a minor. The petitioner became major in the Year, 1996 and as there is no appointment on the compassionate basis by the respondents, the present petition has been preferred in the year, 2008.

(3.) It is submitted by learned Counsel for the respondents that the claim made for compassionate appointment is highly time-barred and as such, no useful purpose will be served as the father of the petitioner expired way back in the Year, 1988. There is a gross delay in preferring this writ petition, even otherwise, also first representation for such appointment made in the Year, 1991 after lapse of a period of three years when the petitioner was still minor and submitted that if longer period is lapsed after the death of the employee, no compassionate appointment may be given as it looses the very purpose ineant for.