1 D.B.Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.273/2010 Vashudev Jhakhar V/s State of Rajasthan & ors. 16.4.2010 Hon'ble the Chief Justice Mr.Jagdish Bhalla Hon'ble Mr.Justice M.N.Bhandari Mr.Mukesh Agrawal for the appellant. By this appeal, a challenge has been made to the order dated 28th October, 2009 whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant-petitioner was dismissed. It is a case where the appellant made an application for grant of compassionate appointment pursuant to the Rajasthan Various Services (Amendment) Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”). The learned Single Judge considered the issue and referring to the Rules 2 and 3 of the Rules came to the conclusion that the petitioner's two brothers are already serving Army, thus, as per Rules, appellant is not entitled for compassionate appointment. The learned counsel for the appellant- petitioner submits that the eligibility of the candidate was required to be looked into as on the date of disability or discharge of erstwhile army personnel. However, the authorities and the learned Single Judge have failed to look into it. Both brothers of the appellant were appointed in Army subsequent to the discharge of appellant's father. Thus, aforesaid event could not have been taken into consideration. In view of the above, the judgment of the learned Single Judge has been assailed. 2 We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the judgment impugned herein. The learned Single Judge has noticed the impact of Rules 2 and 3 of the Rules and came to the conclusion that if a family member of the deceased or disabled Army personnel is already in service then he/she is not eligible for compassionate appointment and accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed. We find that compassionate appointment cannot be claimed as a matter of right and such appointments are given to take care of immediate need of the family and to mitigate the hardship due to death or disability of the bread earner in the family. It is a fact that the appellant's father became disabled and discharged in 1978 and at that time, appellant was of the age of one or two years only. The appellant has survived for long 31 years thereafter and in any case, when two of his brothers are already in army service, then not only in view of the Rules, but looking to the fact that the appellant cannot be said to have indigence condition for securing compassionate appointment, we do not find any error in the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, this appeal fails and is dismissed in limine. (M.N.Bhandari)J. (Jagdish Bhalla)C.J. Parmar