CW 6573/07 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.6573/2007 Mukesh Kr Sharma Versus State & Ors. Date of Order ::: 15/01/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. RK Mathur & Mr. Ajay Tantia, for petitioner. Instant petition has been filed with the grievance that petitioner was initially appointed as Beldar under compassionate Rules but was not considered for higher post while other similarly situated persons/applicants having similar qualification like petitioner at a later point of time were considered in higher pay scale of Helper under compassionate Rules vide order dt.04/01/05 (Ann.4). Petitioner was appointed as Beldar under Raj. Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of deceased Government servant Rules, 1996 (“Rules, 1996”) vide order dt.13/08/99 (Ann.1) in pay scale of Rs.2550-3200/- vice his father (Shri Prakash Sharma) who died on 15/03/99 while in service; in pursuance whereof, he joined the service allegedly under protest on 25/08/99. As alleged in the petition, one another employee died while in service in the cadre of Class IV but his son/dependent was considered for compassionate appointment to the post of CW 6573/07 //2// Helper in pay scale of Rs.2650-4000/- vide order dt.04/01/05 (Ann.4). Grievance of petitioner is that despite holding similar qualification like other similarly situated compassionate appointees, his candidature for compassionate appointment in higher pay scale was not considered; which according to him, is in violation of Art.14 & 16 of the Constitution. In support, Counsel placed reliance upon decision of Apex Court in Surya Kant Kadam Vs. State of Karnataka (AIR 2001 SC 2415). Submission of the Counsel is of no substance for the reason that once looking to availability of the post, suitable employment under compassionate Rules, 1996 taking note of his qualification held at the relevant time was offered in favour of petitioner vide order dt.13/08/99 (Ann.1) in pursuance whereof, he joined on 25/08/99, may be under protest, which will be of no significance and no parity can be claimed qua a latter appointment, another incumbent/dependent of deceased government servant was considered under compassionate Rules, 1996 in higher pay scale to the post of Helper vide order dt.04/01/05 (Ann.4) and once petitioner joined the service, may be under CW 6573/07 //3// protest, will cease his right for further consideration against higher post or pay scale under compassionate Rules, 1996. Judgment of Apex Court in Surya Kant Kadam Vs. State of Karnataka (supra) relied by Counsel is of no assistance and that it was a case where after compassionate appointment was made to dependent/incumbents, they were later on further promoted on higher post of Excise sub Inspector whereas petitioner was claiming seniority on the basis of their compassionate appointment in the cadre of Clerk, which was considered being in violation of service Rules. This Court does not find justification to interfere in the action of respondents. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.3/6573CW07-15Jn.doc