1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1642 OF 2011 Sushant Thosar Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ano. ........................................................................................................................................................................ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders ........................................................................................................................................................................ Shri O. Y. Kashid Adv for petitioner. Smt Bodade AGP for respondents. CORAM: B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & A. P. BHANGALE JJ. DATED: 17th OCTOBER, 2011. . Petitioner has not pointed out any special circumstance to invoke jurisdiction or consideration under Clause 12 of the Bombay High Court Revised Guidelines for appointment on compassionate grounds 2007. It is settled law that grant of compassionate employment is by way of exception and same otherwise would have violated Article 14 and 16 of Constitution of India. The compassionate employment, therefore, needs to be extended strictly in accordance with Rules. Here father of the petitioner is admittedly in employment. As no special reasons to invoke jurisdiction under Rule 12 are pleaded and made out, we are not inclined to examine the contentions regarding it at this stage. We, therefore, reject the petition. JUDGE JUDGE svk