IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10882 of 2008 ALOK KUMAR JHA, S/O LATE SHYAMDEO JHA, R/O VILLAGE ORIYAPH, PATHARHATTA, P.S. KAHALGAON AND DISRICT BHAGALPUR. ............PETITIONER. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY CUM COMMISSIONER, P.H.E.D. BHAGALPUR. 2.THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BHAGALPUR. 3.THE DISTRICT ESTABLISHMENT COMMITTEE THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, COLLECTOR, BHAGALPUR. 4.THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, P.H.E.D. BHAGALPUR. 5.THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.H.E.D., BHAGALPUR. ..............RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 03.05.2011 Having heard counsel for the parties and taking into account that admittedly the father of the petitioner was in work-charge establishment, this court is of the considered opinion that the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground was/is impermissible, as has been held by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dilip Kumar Bhattacharya & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in 2004(4) PLJR 889. Counsel for the petitioner would hosever submit that the entry in service-book of the father of the petitioner dated 30.09.1993 will go to show that he was taken into regular establishment. In the considered opinion of this Court, such impression of learned counsel for the petitioner is also incorrect, inasmuch as, the portion of service book with the endorsement of Executive Engineer dated 2 30.09.1993 relied upon by him reads as follows:- ^^v/kh{k.k vfHk;Urk ds dk;kZy; vkns'k la[;k 33 fnukad 21-3-88 }kjk budh fu;qfDr nSfud iqLr ls dk;ZHkkfjr LFkkiukUrxZr dh x;h rFkk bUgksaus 22-3-88 dks [kyklh ds in ij ;ksxnku fn;kA** The aforementioned entry made even in the date of 30.09.1993 i.e., after the father of the petitioner had died on 21.03.1993, would therefore, go to show that till his death, he was only in work-charge establishment and his service was never brought into regular establishment. Once this aspect becomes clear, it has to be held that the petitioner will not be entitled for appointment on compassionate ground, inasmuch as, an employee working in work-charge establishment does not hold any sanctioned post which is an essential requirement of the Government policy of compassionate appointment contained in the circular dated 05.10.1991. It is this aspect of the matter which has been fully explained by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dilip Kumar Bhattacharya & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in 2004(4) PLJR 889. That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and is dismissed 3 accordingly. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J)