IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14001 of 2011 Prabhat Kumar S/O Late Permanand Prasad R/O Vill. P.O. Taiyabpur, Via - Mahnar, P.S. Desari, Distt. Vaishali Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Deputy Secretary to the Government, Department Of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Bihar, Patna 3. The District Magistrate, Saharsa 4. The Deputy Collector (Establishment), Saharsa Collectorate, District - Saharsa 5. The Anchal Adhikari (C.O.), Sonbarsa, District - Saharsa ----------- 02. 17.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Annexure-12 is the order of rejection of the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment on the ground of same being time barred. Father of the petitioner who was working as an Assistant in the office of the Sonbarsa Anchal, in the district of Saharsa, died in harness way back on 13.9.1980. An application was made by the wife of the deceased employee for compassionate appointment in the year 1988. Since there were certain infirmities, same was returned for correction and matter dragged on from year to year. Yet another claim on behalf of the petitioner is now made for such compassionate appointment. The District Compassionate Appointment Committee headed by the District Magistrate considered the claim and rejected it in terms of resolution dated 16.6.2011 contained in Annexure-12 and therefore the writ application. Contention of the counsel is that if no fault is attributable to the petitioner or his family for having asserted 2 their right for compassionate appointment and the claim was tied up in bureaucratic red tape then right of the petitioner cannot be extinguished for consideration for appointment under compassionate head. Submission of the counsel could be correct but when it comes down for appreciation of actual state of affairs, then this Court cannot lose sight of the basic principle or object behind compassionate appointment which is to provide immediate relief to the family, which may be in distress, due to loss of the bread earner. In the present case death happened in the year 1980, which is almost 31 years ago. Whether such death can now be utilized for gaining appointment under compassionate head is a big question mark, which stares on the face of the petitioner. Looking at the time frame when the death occurred and that family has survived for, no right is created in favour of the petitioner for appointment under compassionate head. Compassionate appointment cannot be used as a means of gaining appointment, which any way violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India but for existence of such policy. Writ is dismissed. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)