1 S.B. Civil writ petition No. 7945/2009 Om Singh vs State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order : 10.3.2010 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr. Girish Sankhala, for the petitioner. <><><> Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner's father Mool Singh, who was in service of the respondent-department died on 14.2.2007. The petitioner submitted application for getting the appointment on compassionate grounds under Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependants of Deceased Government Servant Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1996 for short). The petitioner's said request was declined by the respondents by order dated 1st July, 2007 (Annex.7) on the ground that since the petitioner has three children and one born after cut off date 1st June, 2002, therefore, in view of the Government's order dated 20th June, 2001, the petitioner is not eligible for appointment to any post. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Rules of 1996 have been given over riding effect by Rule 11 and there is no prohibition for giving appointment to the persons having more than 2 children, one born after cut off date and, therefore, the order under challenge is absolutely illegal and contrary to the Rules of 1996. It is also submitted that there is a provision of relaxing in the rules as 2 provided under proviso to sub-rule (3) of Rule 10 of the Rules of 1996. The petitioner submitted several representations for relaxation, but that has not been accepted by the respondents. I considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the Rules of 1996. Rule 11 of the Rules of 1996 is as under: - “11. Over-riding effect.- These Rules and any other issued thereunder shall have effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any rules, regulations or orders in force at the commencement of these Rules.” It is true that Rule 11 gives over riding effect so as to prevail the Rules of 1996, but in the Rules of 1996 itself there is a condition, which is required by the candidate for getting the appointment in the Government service. The sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Rules of 1996 is as under: - “(1) the dependent should possess the qualification prescribed for the post under the concerned service rules at the time of appointment.”were The sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Rules of 1996 makes it clear that appointment can be given to any applicant only provided he is eligible to the appointment as per the Rules obviously for the post. It is true that there is a provision for giving relaxation in Rules, but so far as not giving relaxation in the matter where the person is having more than 2 children and one 3 born after the cut off date then it is as per the national policy of the India and, therefore, in such situation, no such relaxation can be extended for appointment so as to open the door for the appointment to the persons who have given birth of 3rd child after cut off date. In view of the above,there is no merit in this writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed. [PRAKASH TATIA], J. cpgoyal/-