1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6651 OF 2008 Mohd. Vasim Mohd. Hanif .. petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra and others. .. Respondent. --- Ms. Surekha Mahajan , Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K. Kadam, AGP for the repondent No.1. Mr. P.R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate for respondent NO.3 Mr. S.N. Janakwade, Advocate for respondent No.4. CORAM : A.P. DESHPANDE & N.D. DESHPANDE,JJ. DATE : 12TH JANUARY, 2010. ORAL ORDER :- 1] The present petition has been filed seeking compassionate appointment. The case of the petitioner is that, his father while being in service expired in the year 1989 as he was suffering from Cancer. The petitioner's father was working as Assistant Teacher in the respondent No.3 society. At the time of death of the petitioner's father, the petitioner was aged 6 years and he attained majority in the year 2001. Thereafter, it is the case of 2 the petitioner that repeated representations were made to the authorities and the school management. However, the compassionate appointment was not granted. Aggrieved thereby, belatedly this petition has been filed in the year 2008. The petitioner also seeks to challenge the appointment of the respondent No.4 who was appointed as an Assistant Teacher, in the year 2008. 2] We are afraid, the petitioner cannot question the validity of the appointment of someone else on the ground that the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was pending consideration. There is no right in the petitioner to claim compassionate appointment for the reason that the father of the petitioner expired in the year 1989 and also for the reason that the present petition has been filed belatedly after a period of 8 years, after attaining majority by the petitioner, we decline to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioner. 3] In the result, the writ petition is summarily dismissed. [N.D. DESHPANDE,J.] [A.P. DESHPANDE.J.] Grt/-