IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9351 of 2007 Kamakhya Narayan Singh, son of late Ram Parikha Singh, resident of Village Parsama, P.S. Paraya, District Gaya. --------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The District Magistrate cum Chairman of the Compassionate Appointment Committee, Patna. 3. The D.G.P., Bihar, Patna. 4. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Bihar, Patna. 5. The Inspector General of Police, Patna Range. 6. The Officer-incharge-cum-Inspector, Pirbahor Police Station, Patna. -------- Respondents ----------- 2 6.4.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The claim of compassionate appointment of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground of his application filed by him in the year 1995 to be barred by limitation under the then Government policy dated 12.7.1977 in vogue prescribing limitation of two years time to file such an application, inasmuch as, the date of death of the father of the petitioner is 2.9.1976. Admittedly, the date of birth of the petitioner is 27.9.1972, which would mean that he was not even of four years of age on the date of death of his father. The period of limitation in the circular dated 12.7.1977 being of two years, the petitioner had to 2 become major at least in those two years in order to become eligible of such appointment. That was not possible because even as on 2.9.1978 within two years of the death of his father, he still was around six years of age. The petitioner, in fact, became major only in the year 1990 and, therefore, his application filed in the year 1995 was clearly barred by limitation. This aspect of the matter in fact even otherwise has been settled by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Anil Kumar Singh Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. and other analogous cases reported in 1993(1)PLJR 414 wherein it has been explained that the appointment on compassionate ground cannot be claimed by way of reservation by a minor dependent that whenever he would become major, he would be having a liberty to file such an application, compelling the Government to appoint him on compassionate ground. In the Division Bench judgment, it has also been clarified that if a person, being dependant of a deceased employee, would become major within a period of limitation 3 prescribed then alone his case has to be considered, otherwise such person would become ineligible for appointment on compassionate ground. At this stage, counsel for the petitioner would try to date back the filing of application by him for seeking appointment on compassionate ground from 1995 to 1990, an aspect which has been seriously controverted by the respondents in their counter affidavit but, then, assuming that such application was filed in the year 1990 that also will not in any way improve the case of the petitioner, inasmuch as, even then it would stand barred by limitation of two years as was prevalent in the policy in vogue at the time of the death of the father of the petitioner. That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)