IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7898 of 2006 Umesh Singh, son of Late Dhruv Narayan Singh, Resident of village- Pipra, P.S. Govindganj, District-East Champaran ….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The District Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran 3. The Superintending Engineer, Trihut Nahar Anchal, Bettiah, West Champaran 4. The Executive Engineer, Trihuta Nahar Paramandal No.1, Bettiah, West Champaran …………………….. Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, Advocate For the State: Mr. G.P.16. ------------ 3. 20.3.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has approached this Court for quashing the order dated 28.3.2006 (Annexure-3) passed by the Respondent No.2, the District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah by which his application for appointment on compassionate ground has been rejected. The petitioner seeks compassionate appointment on the death of one Dhruv Narayan Singh on 10.8.2001 who was in service of the State Government. The petitioner claims to be his adopted son. It is submitted that he was adopted at the age of 10 years by the deceased government employee for which a Godnama was also executed by his father on 24.1.1980 when he was just 10 years of age. Subsequently, the said deed of adoption was registered on 29.4.1998 after the death of his so called adopted father. The petitioner has been paid all the death-cum-retiral benefits as his nominee. The application of the petitioner for compassionate 2 appointment was considered by the District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah and he came to the conclusion that the deed of adoption itself has been registered in the year 1998 when the petitioner was 28 years old and already married and thus on both counts he was disentitled to be adopted. He has further disbelieved the claim of the petitioner regarding adoption in the year 1980 on the ground that the certificate issued by the Bihar School examination Board in 1985 shows him as son of Suryadeo Narayan Singh as his natural father and not Dhruv Narayan Singh, the deceased government employee which would have been the case if there had been a genuine adoption prior to the said date. Similarly, it is pointed out that in the subsequent college leaving certificate also the name of natural father is mentioned as the father of the petitioner. For the said reasons his claim for compassionate appointment has been rejected disbelieving the case of adoption. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s family being villagers were not aware of the technicalities of the law and in accordance with the local customs adoption had been made. It is thus submitted that since the entire death-cum-retiral dues have been given to the petitioner stating him to be the adopted son of the deceased government employee, he may also be accepted as his son for compassionate appointment. On a consideration of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any illegality in the order of the District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah. The reasonings 3 given in the order are wholly acceptable particularly considering the fact that till the very late stage after 1980 the natural father of the petitioner has been shown as his father and not the deceased government employee Dhruv Narayan Singh who is his own uncle by relationship. Thus, there is no merit in the writ application and it is accordingly dismissed. S.Pandey (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)