IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7923 of 2007 AJIT KUMAR SINHA son of late Gopal Prasad resident of village Nasriganj, P. O. Digha, District- Patna. … Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Secretary, Department of Home (Police), Govt. of Bihar. 3. The District Magistrate, Patna District, Patna. 4. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna District, Patna. … Respondents. ----------- 2. 05.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Admittedly, the father of the petitioner died on 26.11.1989 and at that point of time the petitioner was merely aged about 10 years. The policy which was in vogue in the year 1989, had prescribed a period of limitation of five years for filing such an application seeking appointment on compassionate ground. The petitioner even in the period of limitation of five years could not become major and therefore the view taken by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna in his letter dated 20.7.1990 rejecting the case of the petitioner on the ground of delayed filing of such application, does not suffer from any error. Moreover, the District Compassionate Appointment Committee had also gone by the application filed by the petitioner and not by his sister who in the year 1990 had allegedly made a request that the 2 Government should wait till his minor brother, this petitioner, would become major for considering his case for appointment on compassionate ground. This aspect of the matter, in fact, stands settled 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 the application by a minor for appointment on compassionate ground could be entertained only if he becomes major within the period of limitation i.e. five years. Admittedly, the petitioner was not major and that should have been good enough to reject his application. The period of limitation cannot be explained by the petitioner by taking a plea that his sister had earlier filed an application and that should be treated as main application. In that view of the matter, this Court would not find any reason to interfere with the decision of the authority rejecting the case of the petitioner for his appointment on compassionate ground. In any event, the petitioner has survived for 22 years and therefore now no useful purpose would be served by directing the authorities to consider the case of the petitioner on compassionate ground as was laid down 3 by the Apex Court in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal Vs. State of Haryana & Ors. reported in 1994(4)SCC 138. That being so, this Court would not find any merit in this application and it is, accordingly, dismissed. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)