IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9367 of 2007 Ravindra Kumar Paswan, son of late Singheshwar Paswan, resident of Mani Colony, Argara Chowk, Mohalla Madhubani, P.S. K.Hat, Town and District Purnea. ------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through Secretary, Department of Welfare, Government of Bihar, patna. 2. Director, Department of Welfare, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Deputy Director, Welfare, Purnea Division, Purnea. 4. Collector, Purnea. 5. District Welfare Officer, Purnea. -------- Respondents ----------- 2 6.4.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr. Rajendra Narain in his usual fairness would submit that though the petitioner has a very good case on merit but he will have no explanation to the delay in filing of the writ application. He, however, had tried to explain such delay by taking a plea that earlier the widow of the deceased employee had filed an application when her husband died on 21.7.1978 in harness but, the authorities had not done the needful by appointing her and, therefore, after the petitioner became major, he had filed fresh application seeking appointment on compassionate ground in the year 2000, which has been rejected by holding it to be time 2 barred. This court would never doubt the ingenuity of the submission of Mr. Narain but then the fact remains that the mother of the petitioner, who had a good and valid claim for appointment on compassionate ground way back in the year 1978, had slept over her right and also did not move this Court when she was allegedly given a rough deal by not being appointed on compassionate ground. The story of the mother of the petitioner, therefore, came to an end the moment she had herself given up her own claim. Now comes the case of the son, the petitioner. Admittedly, he was a minor when his father had died in the year 1978 and remained minor even in next two years being the period of limitation in the then Government policy dated 12.7.1977. This aspect of the matter has already been held by the 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 held that if a minor does not attain majority within 3 the prescribed period of limitation, he would be disentitled to claim appointment on compassionate ground after he would attain majority. That in fact would be sufficient to answer the grievance of the petitioner, the son. The family of the deceased employee in fact has survived as on date for a period of almost 33 years and such a gross delay in moving this Court by itself would disentitle the petitioner from claiming a direction for his appointment on compassionate ground. In that view of the matter, this Court would not interfere with the impugned order declining appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)