SBCWP NO.2065/04. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2065/2004. Lokesh Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of order : 4/9/2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Arvind Bhardwaj for the petitioner. ****** This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner claiming compassionate appoiintment on the ground that his father who was serving as Class- IV died in harness on 22/12/1997. It is coontended that he left behind two daughters and three sons besides widow Smt.Bhoor Bai. Petitioner was minor at the time of death. He possessed Secondary School in the year 2002 and got registered with the employment exchange Kota on 18/10/2002. Mother of the petitioner finally made an application to the respondents on 16/1/2008 for giving appointment to the petitioner's elder brother Dharam Raj Singh but the respondents declined that application for the reason that father of the petitioner deceased Shiv Singh in fact had another wife Smt.Bhool Bai who SBCWP NO.2065/04. 2 also applied for compassionate appointment on 7/1/2008. When respondents did not grant compassionate appointment to the elder brother of petitioner, Dharam Raj Singh, his application was also rejected by the respondents on 19/1/2008. His mother again submitted an application on 29/1/1998 for compassionate appointment. Learned counsel submitted that when application of the mother was not accepted, she filed a civil suit that was rejected because the appointment could not be given to the minor son Deshraj Singh. Learned counsel submitted that when petitioner came to know about rejection of such application, he filed another application on 2/5/2003 requesting for his compassionate appointment which too was rejected by the respondents on 23/8/2003 on the ground that it has been submitted with delay of 7 years. It is submitted that when compassionate appointment was not timely granted to the mother and elder brother of the petitioner despite request, respondent cannot arbitrarily reject application of the petitioner because he could apply only after he became major. Learned counsel relied on the government circular dated 29/4/1999 and argued that Rajasthan Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1996 have been amended to provide compassionate appointment only to a dependent of the deceased governnment servant, who was minor at the time of death but also if he moves SBCWP NO.2065/04. 3 an application in this regard within 90 days after he attains majority i.e. 18 years. Learned counsel therefore prayed that order passed by the respondents be quashed and set-aside and the respondents be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment. Respondents have filed reply to the writ petition in which they have contested claim of the petitioner and they have submitted that in face deceased government servant had two wives namely Smt.Bhoor Bai and Bhool Bai. He had two sons and one daughter. Smt.Bhool Bai applied to the court of Kota in Case No.41/1989 on 2/1/1990 that her life was in danger from her husband late Shri Shiv Singh, hence she wanted to live independent/separately. Deceased Shri Shiv Singh married Smt.Bhool Bai on 27/4/1990 as narrated in Case No.74/98 before the Court of District Judge, Kota in the judgment dated 22/3/2004. Smt.Bhool Bai submitted an application before the respondents for compassionate appointment on 16/1/1998 but she was advised to submit application in prescribed proforma. She later submitted an application on 17/1/1998. As the age of Dharam Raj Singh was less than 18 years hence cannot be granted appointment. She again applied for giving appointment in prescribed form. At the time of submission of the application form, Dharam Raj Singh was 15 years and 6 months therefore he could not be SBCWP NO.2065/04. 4 granted appointment. Smt.Bhoor Bai filed another suit for permanent and mandatory injunction but the same was rejected. Smt.Bhoor Bai never applied for her own appointment. She was insisting for appointment of her minor son Dharam Raj Singh. Learned counsel relied on the judgment of this Court in Mancha Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : RLR 2001(1) 433 wherein validity of Notification dated 19/4/1999 was examined. The amendment so made was struck down as ultravires and violative of provisions of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India wherein, it was held that right to compassionate appointment cannot be deferred for an indefinite period and that such appointment shall not be granted after inordinate delay from the death of the employee. Even otherwise, there are catena of judgments of Supreme Court that compassionate appointment has to be provided immediately after the date of death to provide a succor to the family/dependent of the sole bread earner. Apart from this, it appears that Smt.Bhoor Bai was living separately from the deceased government servant from the time much before his death. I do not find any merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil