IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1840 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 10863 of 2008 With Interlocutory Application No. 8282 of 2011 In Letters Patent Appeal No.1840 of 2011 ====================================================== Md. Imtiyaz Khan Son of Late Md. Shakur R/o Mohalla - Choudhary Tola, Kahalgaon, District – Bhagalpur. .... .... Petitioner-Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 3. The Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 4. The District Magistrate, Bhagalpur 5. The Chief Engineer (Mechanical), Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna 6. The Executive Engineer (Mechanical), Water Resources Department, Bihar, Patna .... .... Respondents-Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Subodh Prasad, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Gautam Bose, AAG-8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Patna High Court LPA No.1840 of 2011 (2) dt.05-12-2011 2 / 3 2 2 05-12-2011 Interlocutory Application No. 8282 of 2011: The delay of 102 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Letters Patent Appeal No.1840 of 2011: Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 27th April 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 10863 of 2008, the writ petitioner has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. The writ petitioner is the son of one Md. Shakur, a work charge employee of the State Government. The said Md. Shakur passed away in 2004 in harness. The appellant’s claim for compassionate employment was rejected on the ground that the scheme for compassionate employment is not extended to the wards or dependents of the work charge employees. The challenge to the said refusal in C.W.J.C. No. 10863 of 2008 has failed. Therefore, this Appeal. Learned advocate Mr. Subodh Prasad appears for the appellant. He has relied upon a Government Memo dated 4th February 1949 and a Notification dated 26th April 1950 to submit that the work charge employees have the same status as that of temporary servants of the Government and that they are entitled to the same service conditions. The work charge employees may have the benefit of the same service conditions as the temporary servants of the Government. However, in our opinion, the compassionate employment of the wards and dependants of the deceased Government servants cannot be said to be a condition of service of the Government servants. In our opinion, the above referred Memo Patna High Court LPA No.1840 of 2011 (2) dt.05-12-2011 3 / 3 3 or the Notification cannot be invoked to hold that the Late Md. Shakur was a permanent Government servant and that the appellant being his son has a right to compassionate employment. Reliance placed upon the judgment in the matter of Dilip Kumar Bhattacharya v. the State of Bihar, [2004(4) PLJR 889] by Mr. Subodh Prasad does not support the claim made by him. On the contrary, the learned Judges have in their judgment held that the deceased employee if treated in the work charge establishment, their dependants cannot claim employment on compassionate ground. We are afraid, we cannot agree with Mr. Subodh Prasad that by sheer long service in work charge establishment, Late Md. Shakur became permanent servant of the State. The judgment in the matter of Koshi Project Worker’s Association v. the State of Bihar, [2007(1) PLJR 358] is clearly distinguishable. In that case the work charge employees were already promoted to Class III service in regular establishment. We see no merit in this Appeal. Appeal is dismissed in limine. Pawan/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)