IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8692 of 2007 Arbind Kumar, son of late Baleshwar Ram, resident of Village Brahampur, P.S. Brahampur, Dist. Bhojpur. ------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Director, Secondary Education, Human Resources Development Department, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Deputy Director, Secondary Education, Human Resources Development Department, New Secretariat, Patna. 4. The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Patna. 5. The District Education Officer, Bhojpur, Ara. 6. The Head Mistress Project Girl’s High School, Sahar, Bhojpur. --------- Respondents ----------- 2 28.09.2011 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. Counsel for the State is present. The prayer of the petitioner for payment of arrear of salary from September, 1999 to April, 2001 in fact has been considered by the competent authority in terms of the earlier order of this Court dated 5.7.2005 in CWJC No. 6929 of 2004 and it has been held that the petitioner had obtained his appointment by playing fraud and creating a fictitious recommendation of the District Compassionate Appointment Committee, which had led to also termination of his service. It thus becomes clear that the very appointment of the petitioner was made on the basis of a forged document and in fact his case for compassionate appointment was never considered or recommended by the District 2 Compassionate Appointment Committee. It is also well settled and established procedure that no appointment could be made on compassionate ground without a favourable recommendation of District Compassionate Appointment Committee. The very fact that the petitioner himself was a party to production of a false fictitious and forged document for obtaining appointment on compassionate ground by creating an impression that his case was already recommended by the District Compassionate Appointment Committee. Would disentitle him from claiming payment of salary for the period he could work on the basis of fraud misrepresentation and to that extent, this Court finds no error in the impugned order contained in Annexure-2 rejecting the claim of payment of arrears of salary of the petitioner. That being so, this is a wholly misconceived application and is accordingly dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)