1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.153/2009 IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10324/2008 (Pawan Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) Date of Order : :: 18th May, 2010 Hon'ble The Chief Justice Mr. Jagdish Bhalla Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.N. Bhandari Mr. Deepak Soni for Mr.Praveen Balwada, for the appellant. Mr. Dinesh Yadav, AAG. By the Court: The order dated 22.09.2008 has been challenged by this appeal whereby the writ petition of the petitioner was dismissed. It is a case where an application for seeking compassionate appointment was made on account of death of erstwhile government servant on 08.07.1989. Since, the application was filed belatedly, thus learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition in the light of judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal Vs. State of Haryana reported in 1994 (4) SCC 138. Learned counsel for appellant submits that at the time of death of erstwhile government servant, he was at the 2 age of four months only, thus looking to aforesaid, the application was made on attending the age of majority. Looking to aforesaid, there was no delay in making application for seeking compassionate appointment. Learned Single Judge failed to consider this aspect while dismissing the writ petition. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record of the case. Perusal of record shows that application was made at the time when the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependant of Deceased Government Servant Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules of 1996) came in force. There is a period of limitation prescribed for making application. It is a case where the application for seeking compassionate appointment was not made within the period of limitation as per the Rules of 1996, thus it was not even maintainable on the ground urged before us. This is apart from the fact that the compassionate appointments are made to take care of immediate need of the family living in hardness. If the petitioner's family could survive for good 18 years, then the very purpose and object of seeking compassionate appointment vanished. In view of aforesaid, learned Single Judge dismissed the application seeking 3 compassionate appointment in the light of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal (Supra). This is apart from the fact that the application at Annex.4 is undated but affidavit filed therein shows to be of the year 2005, thus at the time when petitioner was not even major, the application for seeking compassionate appointment was made. In view of aforesaid, the excuse taken for delay no more remains. The writ petition was filed belatedly in the year 2008, thus according to us, it was rightly been dismissed by the learned Single Judge apart from the application being not maintainable under the Rules of 1996, as it was not filed within the period prescribed therein. In view of discussion made above, we do not find any merit in the appeal, accordingly the same is dismissed in limine. (M.N. Bhandari) J. (Jagdish Bhalla) C.J. Item No.14 Preety/Jr.P.A.