IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13551 of 2009 1. BASANTI DEVI W/O LATE JAGDISH NARAYAN VIDYARTHI VILL.- KARHARA, P.O. KADHAR, P.S.- KAUAKOL, DISTT.- NAWADA AT PRESENT MOHALLA KHASGANJ, P.O.- SOHSARAI, DISTT.- NALANDA 2. RAM PRADIP KUMAR S/O SRI YUGESHWAR PRASAD SINGH VILL.- DHANUKI, P.O.- PAROHA, P.S.- MANPUR, DISTT.- NALANDA AT PRESENT MOHALLA- KHASGANJ, P.O.- SOHSARAI, DISTT.- NALANDA Versus 1. MAGADH UNIVERSITY BODH GAYA P.O.- BODH GAYA, DISTT.- GAYA THROUGH THE VICE-CHANCELLOR 2. THE VICE-CHANCELLOR MAGADH UNIVERSITY, BODH GAYA, P.O.- BODH GAYA, DISTT.- GAYA 3. THE REGISTRAR MAGADH UNIVERSITY, BODH GAYA, P.O.- BODH GAYA, DISTT.- GAYA 4. THE PRINCIPAL KISAN COLLEGE SOHSARAI, P.O.- SOHSARAI, DISTT.- NALANDA ----------- 2. 13.01.2010 Heard the counsel for the petitioners, Magadh University and the counsel appearing for the state. This application has been filed by Basanti Devi who is widow of late Jagdish Narain Vidyarthi who was lecturer in the Department of Physics, Kisan College, Sohsarai, a constituent college of Magadh University, Bodh Gaya. Petitioenr No. 2, Ram Pradip Kumar is the son-in-law of petitioner No. 1. Jagdish Narain Vidyarthi died in harness on 27.06.2008 leaving behind two sons; Vijay Narain Vidyarthi and Ajay Narain Vidyarthi and two daughters; Partima Sinha and Malti Kumari. Petitioner No. 1, Basanti Devi nominated her son-in-law (petitioner No. 2) for getting compassionate appointment in college service, and thus, the petitioner No. 2 submitted his application for appointment on compassionate ground. The sons and daughters of Jagdish Narain Vidyarthi also put their signature on No Objection Certificate in 2 case the petitioner No. 2 gets appointment on compassionate ground. However, the application of petitioner No. 2 was rejected by the Registrar of the Magadh University, Bodh Gaya on the ground that being son-in-law of late Jagdish Narain Vidyarthi, the petitioner No. 2 does not come within the category of dependant entitled for compassionate appointment. Petitioners have filed this application for quashing of the order passed by the Registrar, Magadh University and also for a direction to appoint petitioner No. 2 on compassionate ground on any Class-III or Class-IV posts as per eligibility. The provisions of compassionate appointment were made to give financial assistance to such family who are faced with a situation of starvation on account of sudden death of their bread earner. Department of Administrative & Personnel Reforms, Govt. of Bihar introduced this provision by issuing a circular. This circular has been amended, modified time to time. Persons who fall within the category of dependants that is mentioned in the circular and in that category, son-in-law of the deceased-employee who died in harness, does not find place. The provision for compassionate appointment is an exceptional mode of appointment and its limit cannot be stretched too far as the posts which fell vacant, that are to be filled up following the procedure for appointment so that most eligible and competent persons should be appointed against those posts. As such, the provisions as mentioned in the circular for compassionate appointment cannot be interpreted giving too liberal 3 view to the compassionate appointment. Counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the decision reported in 2001(4) PLJR 241 in which a direction had been issued for compassionate appointment of son-in-law. I find that facts of that case are quite different from the facts of present case. In that case, the widow had two sons; one of them was mentally derailed and another was minor. The widow had no source of income and considering the misery and helplessness of the widow, a direction had been issued for appointment of her son-in-law as a special case. In the present case, petitioner No. 1 has two sons who are employed and have sources of income. Simply by saying that they had separated from their father during his lifetime, is not sufficient for widening the definition of dependants, eligible for compassionate appointment and including the son-in-law in the category of dependants entitled for compassionate appointment. Another decision which has been relied upon by the petitioners’ counsel is 1991(2) PLJR 383. In that case, nephew of the deceased-employee was directed to be appointed on compassionate appointment. The deceased employee was a police personnel and he had no children of his own. The widow was not in a position to be appointed on compassionate ground. Since she consented for appointment of her nephew as he was like her son and looking after her, a direction had been issued for appointment of nephew, on compassionate ground. This was also a special case in which 4 such direction was issued. Such directions are not directions in rem rather such findings can be treated as directions in personem. I do not find any merit in this application. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Petitioner No. 1, in case, is interested for her own appointment on compassionate ground, she may apply for it and authorities may consider her application in accordance with law. AKV/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)