D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.987/2008 Norat Mal Burad Vs. Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institution Tribunal, Mini Secretariat, Jaipur & Ors. Date of Judgment :: July 23, 2008 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. D.P. Sharma for the appellant(s). **** This appeal seeks to challenge the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge on 22.8.2006 whereby writ petition of the appellant was dismissed. In the writ petition, the appellant had challenged the judgment passed by the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institution Tribunal on 7.10.1999 dismissing his application wherein he had prayed for direction to the respondents to grant him appointment on compassionate ground. The appellant claimed such appointment on account of the fact that his father was serving the respondent-Educational Institution. It was argued that as per Rule 10(xi) of the Rajasthan Non- Government Educational Institutions Rules, 1996, the respondent, which was an aided educational institution, was obliged to follow the instructions issued by the government from time to time. Reliance was placed on the circular dated 29.9.1978 issued by the government. Learned counsel argued that the according to the aforesaid circular, the Rajasthan Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servant Dying while in service Rules, 1975 were applied even to the private aided institutions and, therefore, the Rules of 1996 would also apply. We have gone through the judgment of the learned tribunal as also of the learned Single Judge. -2- The learned tribunal dismissed the application of the appellant holding that the Rajasthan Non- Government Educational Institutions Rules, 1996 do not apply to the employees of the aided educational institution as the government has not issued any notification enforcing the rules for such institutions. The aforesaid circular, on which reliance is placed, only provides that relaxation in the process of recruitment shall be granted if appointment of dependants of government servant dying while in service is made under the Rules of 1975, and such relaxation also would be applicable to the aided educational institution. That merely enabled the aided institution, if they wanted to confer such appointment to the dependants of their deceased employee(s), to do so in relaxation of the normal recruitment process. As such, no circular or notification has been brought to our notice by which the government has enforced the Rules of 1996 even to the aided educational institution making it compulsory for them to consider the request for grant of compassionate appointment to the dependants of their employee(s) dying while in service. Even otherwise, death of the concerned employee in the present case had taken place long ago on 15.12.1995. At this belated stage, now when we are deciding this appeal in 2008, the very object of appointment on compassionate ground has been lost. The learned Single Judge, in our view, was therefore, justified in dismissing the writ petition and upholding the judgment of the learned tribunal. We, therefore, do not find any merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. (NARAYAN ROY), CJ. Skant/-