IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.853 of 2008 Ranjan Rastogi @ Rajan Rastogi, Daughter of Sri Prem Shankar Rastogi, Resident of Village Sahuli, Post Office Sahauli, Police Station Hussainganj, District Siwan…………………………………………………………..Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, Siwan. 4. The District Education Officer, Siwan 5. The Headmaster, V.M.H.E. High School, Siwan……………………………………………………….Respondents ----------- 2 31.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has filed this writ application specifically alleging hostile discrimination. Her case is that her application for compassionate appointment was considered and accepted and the letter, appointing her on class IV post, was issued. Since petitioner had acquired qualification of graduation, before her joining, she submitted a representation for consideration of her case for appointment against class III post. The same was rejected. Hence, she was compelled to join on class IV post. In the meanwhile, two more persons, namely, Md. Afroz Zama and one Mukesh Kumar, who were also appointed on class IV post with qualification of matriculation, submitted 2 applications for their appointment on class III posts. Hence, petitioner also applied again for consideration of her case for appointment on class III post. The applications of those persons as well as of the petitioner were considered by the District Level Compassionate Committee under the chairmanship of the District Magistrate in its meeting dated 07.04.2006. A copy of the proceeding is annexed as Annexure-3. The Committee allowed the applications of those two persons and resolved to appoint them on class III posts of Constable whereas the application of the petitioner was rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has the qualification for appointment on class III post whereas those two persons are still matriculate. Still only on the recommendation of the Superintendent of Police, appointment of those two persons has been upgraded from class IV post to class III post. Learned counsel submits that joining of the petitioner on class IV post cannot come in the way of the respondents for consideration of her case for appointment on class III post as before her joining, she had already represented the respondents for 3 consideration of her case for appointment on class III post. It was only on the rejection of the same that she was compelled to join on class IV post. Therefore, the principle of acquiescence will not apply in this case. In the counter affidavit it is stated that the petitioner cannot have choice of posting on compassionate ground and she has accepted the post of class IV on being appointed on compassionate ground. That may be so. But the question remains that the persons similarly circumstanced should be treated equally. This Court does not find any reason for non- consideration of the case of the petitioner for appointment on class III post specially when, as per her case, before her joining on class IV post, she had submitted a representation before the respondents for consideration of her case for appointment on class III post. If the applications of said two persons were considered and allowed only on the basis that they did not submit their joining against class IV post and kept on waiting for consideration of their representation, the case of the petitioner also falls in the same category as she submitted her representation, before her joining, for 4 consideration of her case for appointment on class III post. Since the petitioner had already joined on class IV post, this Court is not inclined to disturb the same. But this Court directs the respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioner for her appointment on class III post in accordance with law. If it is found by the respondents that the petitioner had represented for appointment on class III post on the basis of her qualification, prior to her joining on class IV post, her joining on class IV post shall not come in the way of the respondents for consideration of the case of the petitioner. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. BT (J. N. Singh, J.)