IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.8426 of 1997 ================================================== Subhadra Devi, wife of late Madhukar Singh, resident of Village Badawaria, P.S. Sangrampur, District Munger, at present working as office peon on the office of the Executive Engineer, Public Health Divisioni, Munger, P.S. And Dist. Munger. ------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The Secretary, Department of Public Health Engineering, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Engineer-in-Chief, Public Health Engineering Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Collector, Munger, District Munger. 5. The Superintending Engineer, Public Health Engineering Circle, Munger. 6. The Executive Engineer, Public Health Division, Munger. ------ Respondents ================================================== 8 12.07.2011 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. From the order dated 1.7.1999, it would be clear that the sole point on which this writ application was admitted for final hearing, namely, as to whether a dependent of a person working on Work Charge Establishment is entitled for compassionate appointment, stands answered in the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Dilip Kumar Bhattacharya Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in 2004(4) PLJR 889 wherein it has been held that a dependent of a Work Charge employee will not be entitled for appointment on compassionate ground. Having regard to the aforementioned law laid down by the Division Bench in the case of Kumar Bhattacharya (supra), there would be no escape from the position that the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground by an order dated 9.9.1992 pursuant to the recommendation made by the District Compassionate Appointment Committee and her such appointment has continued till date in view of the interim order passed by this Court on 23.9.1997 staying the operation of the impugned order dated 24.7.1997 and 1.9.1997, whereby and whereunder, the services of the petitioner were terminated. Thus, in view of the fact that the petitioner has continued in service for almost twenty years after being appointed on compassionate ground, this Court now would not interfere with her appointment and consequently, this writ application is allowed by quashing both the impugned orders. It is, however, made clear that this case shall not be treated as a precedent for appointment of any dependent of a Work Charge employee. With the aforementioned observations, this application is allowed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J)