IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1242 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16667 of 2007 With Interlocutory Application No. 6067 of 2011 In Letters Patent Appeal No.1242 of 2011 ====================================================== Sunaina Devi, wife of late Ram Nandan Prasad, Resident of Village-Chooto Keshopur, Post and Police Station-Jamalpur, District-Munger. .... .... Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. District Compassionate Committee, Shekhpura, District-Shekhpura through its Chairman. 3. The Collector Shekhpura, District-Shekhpura. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Upendra Prasad, Advocate Mrs. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, Advocate Miss. Chandrakala Jaiswal, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Avnish Nandan Sinha, G.P.-11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2. 06-09-2011 Interlocutory Application No. 6067 of 2011: Delay of 12 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. Patna High Court LPA No.1242 of 2011 (2) dt.06-09-2011 2 / 3 2 Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Letters Patent Appeal No.1242 of 2011: This Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is filed by the writ petitioner against the judgment and order dated 13th April 2011 passed by the learned single Judge in above C.W.J.C. No. 16667 of 2007. The appellant is the widow of one Ram Nandan Prasad, an employee of the State Government. The said Ram Nandan Prasad passed away on 1st November 2003, while in service. Pursuant to the death of the said Ram Nandan Prasad, one of his sons Sanjay Kumar Karn applied for compassionate appointment. The said application was rejected by the District Compassionate Appointment Committee under communication dated 3rd July 2007. The claim was rejected on the ground that in the family of five adults three were in government service and that the family did not suffer penury. Feeling aggrieved, the mother of the applicant Sanjay Kumar Karn filed above C.W.J.C. No. 16667of 2007 under Article 226 of the Constitution. The learned single Judge has upheld the order of the District Compassionate Appointment Committee. Therefore, the present Appeal. We do agree with the learned single Judge that the claim for compassionate appointment made by the aforesaid Sanjay Kumar Karn was rightly rejected. We also note that though it was the aforesaid Sanjay Kumar Karn who applied for compassionate appointment and it was his request which was rejected by the District Compassionate Appointment Committee, the aggrieved person was the said Sanjay Kumar Karn, he did not challenge the order of the District Compassionate Appointment Patna High Court LPA No.1242 of 2011 (2) dt.06-09-2011 3 / 3 3 Committee. Instead, his mother, the present appellant, challenged the decision. In our opinion, the challenge by the mother of the aggrieved person was not maintainable. The appellant had no lucus standi to challenge the order of the District Compassionate Appointment Committee, the petition deserved to be dismissed on that ground also. Appeal is dismissed in limine. Pawan/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)