IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1799 OF 1998 Achal S/o Ankushrao Gadkari .... PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Oths. .... RESPONDENTS Ms. Surekha Mahajan, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. N.B.Patil, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE: 22/07/2010 ORAL ORDER : 1. The petitioner claims compassionate appointment. According to the petitioner, the petitioner’s father was declared to be medically unfit on 20/11/1992 and as such was relieved from service from 23/11/1992. It is submitted that though the petitioner has immediately applied for appointment on compassionate ground, the same is not granted to him. In that view of the matter, the petitioner has approached this Court. 2. Ms. Surekha Mahajan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the authorities have erred in denying the claim of the petitioner, though the petitioner’s father was required to leave the services on account of medically disability. 3. The law regarding compassionate appointment, is by now settled. The compassionate appointment is required to be given so as to enable the family to come out of the hardships that occasion on account of either sudden demise or leaving the job by the earning member of the family. The father of the petitioner is said to have been discharged from services in the year 1992. The period of 18 years have lapsed therefrom. It can not said that the hardship which the petitioner was facing in 1992, still continues in 2010. 4. In that view of the matter, no merit is found in the petition. The petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA ] [ B.R. GAVAI ] JUDGE JUDGE knp/WP 2560.98