IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1018 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1356 of 2009 ====================================================== Vijay Kumar son of Late Muna Ram, resident of Mohalla Chhoti Badalpura, P.O. and P.S. Khagaul, District- Patna. .... .... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Deputy Inspector General, Home Guard, Head Quarter, Chhaju Bagh, Patna. 3. Commandant, Central Training Institute, Bihar Home Guard, Bihta, District Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sheo Dayal Ray, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Lalit Kishor, AAG 1 with Mr. Vikash Kumar, A.C. to AAG 1. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 3 26-07-2011 This Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent arises from the judgment and order dated 26th April 2011 passed by the learned single judge in above C.W.J.C. No. 1356 of 2009. The appellant- writ petitioner claims to be the son of one Muna Ram. The said Muna Ram was employed as Sweeper under the Commandant, Central Training Institute, Bihar Home Guards, Bihta, District Patna. While in service the said Muna Ram passed Patna High Court LPA No.1018 of 2011 (3) dt.26-07-2011 2 away on 16th August 2000 leaving behind him three minor sons including the appellant. The appellant, after attaining majority applied for compassionate employment on 11th May 2011. The application has been rejected by the Committee as it was not made within the time prescribed in the scheme for compassionate employment. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in above C.W.J.C. No. 1356 of 2009. Before the Court the appellant also relied on application made on 9th January 2001. The learned single judge did not believe the said application as there is no evidence of delivery of the said application. As the application made by the appellant did not conform with the scheme for compassionate employment, the writ petition has been dismissed. Therefore, the present Appeal. Learned advocate Mr. Sheo Dayal Ray has appeared for the appellant. He has submitted that the appellant did make application for compassionate employment on 9th January 2001within the time prescribed. Though the appellant was then a minor, he could have been appointed in the Home guard as it is the practice. We see no substance in the argument advanced by Mr. Sheo Dayal Ray. At first there is no evidence of submitting the application dated 9th January 2001. Besides, the appellant could Patna High Court LPA No.1018 of 2011 (3) dt.26-07-2011 3 not have been offered employment even on compassionate ground at the age of 12 years. By the time the appellant attained majority and he applied for compassionate employment, it was beyond the time prescribed in the scheme for compassionate employment i.e., five years from the date of the death. The learned single judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition. No case for interference is made out. The Appeal is dismissed in limine. BTiwary/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)