IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9731 of 2004 SIYA DEVI WIFE OF LATE SURESH PASWAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE GARSANDA, P.S. JAMUI DISTRICT JAMUI – PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COMMANDANT, BIHAR HOME GUARD POLICE, HEAD OFFICE, CHHAJJU BAGH, PATNA. 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, JAMUI. 3. THE DISTRICT COMMANDANT, BIHAR HOME GUARD POLICE, DISTRICT JAMUI – RESPONDENTS. ************ For the petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, Adv. For the State : Mr. Satish Kr. Singh, A.C. to S.C. 1. ************ 10/ 08-04-2011 Heard the parties. 2. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction upon the respondents for payment of adequate compensation to the petitioner due to death of her husband, namely, Suresh Paswan, while he was discharging his duty as Homeguard during the course of election of Gram Panchayat in the district of Jamui in the year 2001. It has further been prayed that the respondents may be directed to appoint her on compassionate ground. 3. It is admitted case of the parties that late Suresh Paswan, the husband of the petitioner, was engaged as Homeguard No. 11457 and was working in the district of Jamui. On 12.04.2001, the husband of the petitioner was deputed on Gram Panchayat election duty at village Nawadah under the Chakai Block in the district of Jamui and, accordingly, polling took place on that date. 2 After the election was over, the husband of the petitioner reported at Sono Police Station and he suddenly fell ill on 13.01.2002. He was taken to Government Hospital Sono and subsequently he was referred to Jamui Sadar Hospital, where during the course of treatment he died. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that since the husband of the petitioner had died during the course of discharge of duty, she is entitled for compensation as also for appointment on compassionate ground. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State, while opposing the prayers made in the present petition, has placed his reliance on the averments made in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.1. In the aforesaid counter affidavit, it has been stated in paragraph-4 that the claim of the petitioner was duly considered by a Three Member Committee under the Chairmanship of Deputy Commandant General, Bihar Homeguard Police and it was recommended that Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand) should be paid to the petitioner by way of ex gratia. It is admitted case of the parties that the aforesaid amount of Rs. 50,000/- has already been paid to the petitioner. In paragraph-5 of the counter affidavit, it has been further stated that as per government circulars and orders, there is no provision for 3 giving compassionate appointment to a dependant of Homeguard volunteer and, therefore, her claim for compassionate appointment has been rejected. 6. After hearing the parties this Court finds that compensation by way of ex gratia has already been paid to the petitioner due to death of her husband, while he was still in harness. Admittedly, death of the husband of the petitioner had taken place in 2001 and more than ten years have elapsed since then. Obviously, there is no provision for compassionate appointment to a dependant of Homeguard volunteer. Furthermore, this Court is of the view that compassionate appointment is normally provided to a dependant for mitigating the needs of a family because of sudden and unforeseen happenings. If the petitioner and her family has sustained for more than ten years, then there is absolutely no question for issuing any direction for her compassionate appointment due to death of her husband in the year 2001. 7. In the result, this writ petition has to fail. It is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. BTiwary/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)