IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14339 of 2007 JITENDRA KUMAR RAM, S/O NO. 14255447X, LATE LNK DHANU LAL RAM, 17 MOUNTAIN DIVISIONAL SIGNAL REGIMENT, GANGTOK, R/O VILLAGE KAJICHAK, POLICE STATION BARAHARA, DISTRICT BHOJPUR AT ARRAH. ………………………PETITIONER. Versus 1.THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI. 2.THE COMMANDING OFFICER, 17 MOUNTAIN DIVISIONAL SIGNAL REGIMENT, GANGTOK. 3.THE COMMANDANT,(HEAD QUARTER) SIGNAL RECORDS,POST BOX NO. 5, JABALPUR. 4.THE COMMANDING OFFICER(HEAD QUARTERS)1 SIGNAL TRAINING CENTRE, JABALPUR,(M.P)- 482001. …………………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 11.04.2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the Union of India. Admittedly the father of the petitioner died on 26.05.2000, while the petitioner was aged about 12 years (his date of birth being 10.05.1988). The petitioner could not become major even in next five years and therefore, the period of limitation as per the army instructions for the purposes of filing of an application for appointment on compassionate ground had come to an end on 26.05.2005, while the petitioner still continued to be a minor. In that view of the matter, this Court will have no difficulty in relying on 2 the ratio laid down by Division Bench in the case of Anil Kumar Singh vs The State of Bihar & ors, reported in 1993(1) PLJR 414, laying down that minor does not have a perpetual right of appointment on compassionate ground even when he would not become major in the prescribed period of limitation for filing application for compassionate appointment. Counsel for the petitioner however submits that the mother of the petitioner had filed an application in the year 2002 and that application should be taken to be on behalf of petitioner. Unfortunately that is not the concept of appointment on compassionate ground. The mother may have informed about the petitioner being minor but petitioner has filed his separate application wherein he could not have shown to be major inasmuch as per his own showing he had attained majority on 10.05.2006. In that view of the matter, this Court would not find any error in the impugned order dated 03.05.2007(Annexure-8), whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been informed to appear in the selection 3 process with all the relevant certificates and testimonials at the nearest Signal Unit/Headquarter for appointment from open market. The petitioner had no indefeasible right of being appointed on compassionate ground and was only eligible for being considered against the policy in vogue in the year 2000. If at the point of time the petitioner was himself ineligible on account of his being minor, he cannot now seek direction from this Court for his appointment on compassionate ground. That being so, this Court would not find any merit in the application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha,J)