IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14691 of 2010 AJIT KUMAR S/O LATE MISHRI LAL R/O MOHALLA- BHAISASOOR, P.S.- LAHERI, DISTT.- NALANDA, AT PRESENT POSTED AS MALE WARD ATTENDANT, SADAR HOSPITAL, BIHARSHARIF, DISTT.- NALANDA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COMMISSIONER, PATNA DIVISION, DISTT.- PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF, DISTT.- NALANDA 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF, DISTT.- NALANDA 5. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF, DISTT.- NALANDA 6. THE CIVIL SURGEON, NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF, DISTT.- NALANDA 7. THE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMME NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF, DISTT.- NALANDA 8. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF, DISTT.- NALANDA 9. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF, DISTT.- NALANDA 10. THE DISTRICT SUB REGISTRAR NALANDA AT BIHARSHARIF, DISTT.- NALANDA ----------- 2 25.4.2011 Writ was initially filed by the petitioner who is a beneficiary of appointment under the compassionate head after the death of his father who was engaged as a jeep driver in Leprosy Control Unit at Biharsharif. This case for compassionate appointment along with other similarly situated candidates were considered and a recommendation came to be made for appointment on a class-IV post. Obviously petitioner is not happy by mere employment but also wants post and position because of the fact that his father died in Class-III post. 2 What is right of the petitioner to be appointed on a Class-III post has not been spelt out in so many words, but so far as the allegation of discrimination is concerned the stand of State has been spelt out in so many words in paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit where the charge or allegation has been denied. Counsel for the State submits that appointment of the petitioner on a Class-IV post was based on the immediate necessity for providing relief to the bereaved family as well as based on the educational qualification and the vacancies existing as such in the district. This counter affidavit was served on the petitioner way back on 09-03-2011. There is no rebuttal to the stand taken by the State. In view of the same the allegation of discrimination not having been made out, no interference was required in the matter. The writ is dismissed being devoid of merit. PN ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)