1 D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10385/2007 Krishan Kumar Gujar vs. The Central Administrative Tribunal & ors. Date: 15.02.2010 HON'BLE MR. K.S. RATHORE, J. HON'BLE MR. MAHESH BHAGWATI, J. Mr. Mahendra Singh Gujar, for the appellant. Mr. V.S. Gurjar, for the respondent. The present writ petition has been preferred against the order dated 10.04.2007 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur whereby the application for compassionate appointment has been rejected. Aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order dated 10.04.2007, the present petitioner preferred this writ petition. 2. Brief facts of the case are that father of the petitioner died while in service on 08.12.2001 and consequent upon the petitioner applied for the compassionate appointment. The case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was rejected vide order dated 27.12.2004 on the ground that his case would not be considered in future 2 because as per latest instructions of the Government his case was more than three years. 3. Having heard the rival submissions of the respective parties and upon careful perusal of the order dated 10.04.2007 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal as well as the letter dated 05.05.20063 which reads as under: “3. The maximum time a person's name can be kept under consideration for offering Compassionate Appointment will be three years, subject to the condition that the prescribed Committee has reviewed and certified the penurious condition of the applicant at the end of the first and second year. After three years, if compassionate appointment is not possible to be offered to the Applicant, his case will be finally closed, and will not be considered again.” 4. As per the order passed by the respondent, the maximum time of a person's name can be kept under consideration for offering compassionate appointment will be three years. In the present case, three years have already been lapsed, therefore, petitioner's case was finally closed and cannot be considered again in view of the aforesaid letter dated 05.05.2003. 3 5. In view of the above fats, the Central Administrative Tribunal has rightly rejected the application of the petitioner and we do not find any illegality in the impugned order dated 10.04.2007 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal and consequently, the writ petition being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed. 6. No order as to costs. (MAHESH BHAGWATI),J. (K.S. RATHORE), J. Mak/- s-48