IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1056 of 2008 Sunil Kumar Paswan, son of late Sobha Lal Paswan, Resident of Khabdah, P.O. Kanhaili, P.S. Narpatganj, District Araria. ------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Water Resource Department. 2. The Director, Department of Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. ------ Respondents ----------- 2 18.4.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner assails the order dated 23.6.2006 (Annexure-2), whereby and whereunder, the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground has been rejected by relying on a Government decision dated 1.2.2006 holding that a long delay in filing the application for compassionate appointment in respect of deceased employee who initially became traceless and presumed to be dead after his not being heard for a period of seven years, would frustrate the very object of compassionate appointment. Learned counsel for the petitioner however very fairly submits that even when the father of the petitioner became traceless on 21.9.1990 and he was presumed to be dead 2 after not being heard for seven years at least with effect from 21.9.1997, the application for compassionate appointment by the petitioner filed only in the year 2006. If that be the factual position, the claim for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground was clearly barred by limitation of five years prescribed for appointment on compassionate ground. The only explanation being offered by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was illiterate person and also stricken by poverty can hardly be accepted in law when the policy itself lays down the prescribed period of five years for filing of such application. The case of the present nature where the Government servant initially would be missing and unheard for in next seven years will have to be considered if the dependant family member makes an application within five years of the prescribed death and the same cannot be refused on the ground that the family could survive in the period of seven years. To that extent, the Government circular dated 3 1.2.2006 would require reconsideration by the authority. In the facts of the present case, however, this Court is satisfied that as the petitioner had not filed application even in the period of five years from the date of presumptive death of his father, he could not have been appointed on compassionate ground. That being so, this application has to be dismissed of course without upholding the correctness of the impugned order. It is accordingly dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)