IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15421 of 2006 KANTI DEVI, widow of Late Ram Nandan Singh, resident of village- Sinduria, P.O.- Rampur, P.S.- Barun, District- Aurangabad. … Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna-1. 3. The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna-1. 4. The Executive Engineer, Vidyut Karya Pramandal, Patna-1. 5. The Executive Engineer, B.S.E.B., Rohtas at Sasaram. 6. The Collector, Rohtas, Sasaram. 7. The Deputy Collector, Establishment Committee, Collectoriat, Rohtas at Sasaram. 8. The Secretary, Energy Department, Bihar, Patna. 9. The Executive Engineer, Works Division, Sasaram, District-Rohtas. ..Respondents. ----------- 5. 30.03.2011 Heard Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Bihar State Electricity Board as also A. C. to Standing Counsel-II for the State. The prayer of the petitioner for her appointment on compassionate ground is wholly unsustainable before this Court inasmuch as even when the husband of the petitioner had died on 28.2.1992 the present writ petition came to be filed on 14.12.2006. The delay of 14 years thus by itself would be sufficient 2 to dismiss this writ petition. Mr. Verma would however invite attention of this Court to a commutation dated 21.9.2006 wherein the recommendation of the District Compassionate Appointment Committee contained in Letter of the Deputy Collector dated 27.7.2006 has been forwarded to the petitioner informing that her application and the required documents were received after the period of limitation of five years and as such the same was rejected by the District Compassionate Appointment Committee. This Court would fail to understand as to how the said letter could in any way extend the date of cause of action. The Apex Court and this Court also in time without number have held that the consideration for appointment on compassionate ground has to be made in order to meet the sudden contingency arising out of death of breadwinning employee but if the dependents of the employee themselves would themselves delay in approaching the authority by filing the application, the whole object of such compassionate appointment could get defeated. 3 Be that as it may, the family has survived for more than nearly 20 years even without compassionate appointment and therefore this Court would not like to now exercise its discretion in a matter in which the petitioner has herself slept over her right for this long period. That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. kanchan/- ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)