IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12484 of 2007 CHANDRA KANT RAI, S/O RAJ KUMAR RAI, R/O VILLAGE GHOGHAPUR, POLICE STATION BABUBARHI, DISTRICT MADHUBANI. ………………………PETITIONER. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2.THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3.THE DIRECTOR, PRIMARY EDUCATION GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4.THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CUM CHAIRMAN DISTRICT ESTABLISHMENT COMMITTEE, MADHUBANI. 5.THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, MADHUBANI. ……………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 08.04.2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner’s prayer for appointment on compassionate ground was rejected way back on 13.01.1988, but then his hopes for such compassionate appointment has not died till today. It is an admitted fact that the father of the petitioner died on 08.09.1979, at a point of time, when the petitioner was aged about 11 years (his date of birth being 30.11.1968), the petitioner’s first application dated 07.12.1987, filed after more than eight years of the date of death of his father was rightly held to be barred by limitation. The petitioner thereafter, in 2 all fairness ought to have given up his case of compassionate appointment but then he has allegedly found a similar case for the purposes of this writ application claiming that alike his case, even when the case of one Vijay Kumar Jha was also rejected on the ground of his application being also time barred he was subsequently appointed. The said order of Sri Vijay Kumar Jha has been placed on record by way of Annexure-1 to the writ application dated 13.01.1988 and he is said to have been appointed by the sub sequent order of the District Superintendent of Education, Madhubani dated 28.04.1993 as contained in Annexure-2 to the writ application. The petitioner would therefore, plead discrimination. There is no counter affidavit to explain this aspect, but again Vijay Kumar Jha has also not been made party to this writ application and therefore, anything observed against him in his absence may prejudice him. While it is true that the appointment of the petitioner could not have been made as he had not become major within 3 the period of limitation, for filing of such application after the death of his father, this Court is not aware of the facts of the case of one Vijay Kumar Jha. It has to be noted that the father of the petitioner had died on 08.09.1979, when the limitation as then, prevailing in the government Circular dated 12.7.1997 for filing an application for appointment on compassionate ground was only two years. Thus the petitioner whose date of birth is 30.11.1968, as on 08.09.1981 the date of death of his father was less than 13 years and hence was a minor. Such a minor was not eligible for being appointed as per the Government policy dated 12.7.1977. This aspect of the matter stands concluded in the judgment of division bench of this Court in the case of Anil Kumar Singh vs The state of Bihar & Others reported in 1993(1) PLJR 414. The only other aspect as with regard to alleged discrimination in the case of Vijay Kumar Jha should also not detain this Court because neither Vijay Kumar Jha has been made party to this writ application nor the petitioner has moved this Court 4 assailing the appointment of Vijay Kumar Jha within a reasonable period of time. As noted above the appointment of Vijay Kumar Jha, on compassionate ground was made in the year 1993 vide order dated 28.04.1993, which is contained in Annexure-2. Thus it would not be sound exercise of discretion to now allow the petitioner to question the appointment of Vijay Kumar Jha made some 18 years earlier. That being so, this Court would not find any reason to interfere in the matter and this application is, accordingly, dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha,J)