1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.1734 OF 2010 Shaikh Muzaffar s/o Shaikh Abdul Haq .. Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra through the Secretary to the Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and anr. .. Respondents Mr.Mangesh M.Ghusale, Advocate holding for Mr.S.N.Pagare and Mr.Zeeshan Zaidi, Advocates for petitioner Mr.K.J.Ghute Patil, A.G.P. for respondent-State CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND N.D.DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 14th June 2010 PER COURT : 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by which the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground. 2. Undisputedly, father of the petitioner expired while discharging his duties in the year 1985. The petitioner, at that point of time was a minor and attained the age of majority on 22.10.2003. It appears that the petitioner had discontinued his education after third standard and the date of birth of the petitioner is 22.10.1985. The petitioner, therefore, at the time of death of his father was barely three months old. It appears that on 2.9.2004, the petitioner submitted an application for appointing him on 2 compassionate ground in Class IV category. Since the application was not decided by the respondents, the petitioner filed Writ Petition in this Court i.e. Writ Petition No.4368 of 2005. The Division Bench of this Court by its order dated 27.6.2007 directed the respondents to decide the application of the petitioner. It appears that despite the directions, the application of the petitioner has not been decided. The petitioner has also filed Contempt Petition No.157 of 2008 because of the breach of the order committed by the respondents. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the aforesaid contempt petition is pending. 3. In that light of the matter, therefore, present petition is a premature petition. Even the prayer which was made in the earlier petition i.e. Wrti Petition 4368 of 2005 that appointment order be issued to the petitioner on compassionate ground was not entertained by the Division Bench as it felt that the application submitted by the petitioner was pending. In that light of the matter, therefore, this petition being premature is dismissed with no orders as to costs. ( N.D.DESHPANDE, J.) ( P.V.HARDAS, J.) (vvr/1734.10wp)