IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10940 of 2006 MANISH KUMAR GOPAL, son of late Pradeep Kumar Singh, resident of village Raj Compound Lalbag District Darbhanga at present resident of Village Hariharpur Lalgarh P.S.G.B.Nagar(Tarwara) District Siwan------------------------petitioner Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Director Human Resources Development Department Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.The Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Secondary and Primary Education, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3.The Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Finance Department Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4.The Director, Secondary Education,Bihar,Patna 5.The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Darbhanga 6.The District Education Officer, Darbhanga 7.The Headmistres R.M.Govt. Girls Intermediate School, Laeria Sarai,Darbhanga--------respondents ----------- For the petitioner :M/S Chito Gupto Prasad Naresh Pd.No.1 For the respondents :Mr.Arjun Pd.Singh,A.C.to S.C.2 ----- 3. 05.05.2009 Heard learned counsels for the parties. The petitioner prays for compassionate appointment on account of the death of his mother on 20.9.1991 while she was working on the post of Assistant Teacher in a Government School. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was born on 26.10.1983 and at the time of death of his mother he had attained nearly the age of 8 years and on 11.3.1995 before the expiry of five years of death of his mother he had filed an application for compassionate appointment 2 by the letter, Annexure-1 which subsequently became traceless. He again filed his application for the same but his claim has been rejected by the District Compassionate Committee at its meeting held on 1.11.2008 on the ground that his claim is time barred. On a consideration of Annexure-B, which is a copy of the proceedings of the District Compassionate Committee, this Court does not find any illegality in the same. The petitioner being less than 8 years of age at the time of death of his mother his application for compassionate appointment was not competent until he attained majority and thus any such so-called application filed on 11.3.1995 is not a competent application in the eye of law. He could not have filed any valid application after the period of ten years on attaining majority as it would evidently be barred by the limitation of five years from the date of death prescribed by the Government Circular dated 5.10.1991 read with the subsequent Circular of 1995. In the said circumstances, his claim for compassionate appointment has rightly been rejected. 3 As held by the Apex Court in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs. The State of Haryana & ors. : (1994)4 SCC 138, the claim for compassionate appointment cannot be made or accepted after the expiry of a long period of time since it is not a claim for a post in lieu of a post rather it is only made for taking care of the immediate financial hardship faced by the family of the deceased Government employee as the sole bread earner. The claim of the petitioner, accordingly, cannot be taken up more than ten years after the death of the deceased employee and has rightly been rejected. The application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Ramesh Kumar Datta,J.) spal/