IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7456 of 2011 Most.Rua Devi & Ors Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ---------------------------------- 2 9.8.2011 There is an old saying that hard cases make a bad law. The present case would be one of the examples. Petitioner no.1 is stated to be wife of one Late Rajendra Prasad Yadav. Petitioner no.2 is married daughter of Rajendra Prasad Yadav and petitioner no.3 is the son-in-law. Back ground to the filing of the present writ petition is that late Rajendra Prasad Yadav who was engaged as Home Guard died in harness. Petitioner no.1 thereafter recommended the name of petitioner no.3 for appointment under the compassionate ground since she had no son or any unmarried daughter to claim benefit of compassionate appointment. She herself was of advanced age, suffering from paralytic attack. Name of the son-in-law was considered and rejected by Annexure-2. Yet another application came to be filed stating that the married daughter should be given benefit of appointment on the basis of compassionate ground because the son-in-law is Gharjamain who takes care of the petitioner no1. The Court has compassion and concern for petitioner no.1. But in absence of law in her favour the Court has no power to give direction for making appointment either of the son-in-law or the married daughter. The right for compassionate appointment is a weak right based on a policy of the State. The right to claim benifit of 2 such kind will flow from the policy and not compassion. Since there is no provision for granting appointment to a son-in-law or a married daughter the claims have been rightly rejected. Submission of the counsel that there is a circular dated 28th November, 1956, contained in Annexure-3 to the writ application. The Notification issued under Article 309 of the Constitution of India empowers the State Government to relax the rule in the matter of undue hardship in a particular case. That power is vested in the State Government for which this Court has nothing to say. If respondents want to relax the rule in making such appointment on compassionate ground the Court will not come in the way but to give a mandamus to the State is uncalled for. The writ application is dismissed with the aforesaid observation. AnilKrSinha (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)