WP(C) 3959/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K.SHARMA. Heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms R. Chakraborty, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate. I have also heard Mr. B. Sarma, l earned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. U.K. Nair, learned Standing Counsel, D .L.R. The petitioner is the brother of Late Mridul Chutia, who died in harness on 18.10.2003. He was a Lat Mandal. The petitioner made an application for appo intment on compassionate ground and from the materials on record, it appears tha t the District Level Committee had recommended his name for appointment. However , when the State Level Committee did not recommend his case, he filed the instan t writ petition. In the para-wise comments furnished by the Deputy Commissioner, Dhemaji, it has been stated that the petitioner being not a near relative defined in t he scheme for compassionate appointment, he is not entitled to get consideration for appointment on compassionate ground. The Apex Court in the decision reporte d in (1994) 1 SCC 192 (Auditor General of India & Ors v. G. Ananta Rajeswara R ao) has held that the compassionate appointment being not a source of recrui tment cannot be enlarged even to the brothers and sisters of the deceased employ ee and that the same will have to be confined to wife and sons and daughters of the deceased employees. Pursuant to the said order, the State Government has als o issued an office memorandum in the year 1995. In view of the above, no fault can be attributed on the action of the re spondents in rejecting the claim of the petitioner. Consequently, the writ petit ion is dismissed.