IA No.1249 of 2009 In WPSS No.1014 of 2008 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Mr. B.S. Adhikari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.C. Tiwari, Brief Holder for the respondents. Urgency application is allowed. The petitioner’s father died in the year 2001. Initially, the widow of the deceased applied and subsequently, the petitioner upon the reaching the age of majority also applied in the year 2004. It is alleged that initially the petitioner’s mother opposed the application of the petitioner for appointment but subsequently gave an affidavit stating that the petitioner’s application may be considered under the dying-in-harness rules. Inspite of such an affidavit, the petitioner’s application remained pending and, eventually the petitioner approached this Court for seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider his case for appointment on compassionate ground. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit admitting the aforesaid fact but contending that since the affidavit of the petitioner’s mother was given after five years, the claim of the petitioner is barred by the limitation. The submission of the respondents is patently erroneous. The petitioner has filed the application within a period of five years which was well within the period of limitation. The application of the petitioner cannot become barred by limitation. An order was required to be passed by the respondents in this regard which had not been done by the respondents. Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the authority to consider and decide the petitioner’s application on merits by a reasoned and speaking order within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated 10.05.2010 Shiv