IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12764 of 2007 MD.ANJUM PRAWEJ, son of late Md. Shahabuddin, Ex-bill Clerk, Electric Supply Sub-division, Jhajha, permanent resident of village Khalasi Tola, Jhajha, P.O. & P.S. Jhajha, District Jamui … Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, through the Secretary, Human Resources Development, Old Secretariat, Baily Road, Patna 2. The Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Bailey Road, Patna 3. The General Manager cum Chief Engineer, Bhagalpur Electric Supply Circle, Bhagalpur 4. The Joint Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna 5. The Personnel Officer, Office of the Electrical Superintending Engineer, Electric Supply Circle, Mungher 6. The Sr. Personnel Manager, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna … Respondents ----------- 2. 8.4.2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for Bihar State Electricity Board. The prayer of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground having been rejected by the competent authority of the Bihar State Electricity Board on the ground of his being over age and thus, disqualified in terms of the policy decision is sought to be assailed on the ground that before such rejection the Government and the Board in the year 2007 had enhanced the maximum age limit from 37 to 40 years for the category of caste (Backward Category) 2 and as such, the application of the petitioner should not have been rejected. Under the policy of compassionate appointment of the Board the maximum age limit has to be taken into account on the date of death of the employee concerned. Admittedly the father of the petitioner died on 30.1.2005 and the date of birth of the petitioner being 1.12.1967 he was aged about 37 years 1 month and 29 days on the date of death of his father. Obviously he had completed the maximum age prescribed for appointment in the Board as was prevalent at that point of time. There would be, therefore, no difficulty in holding that the reason given by the competent authority of the Board in rejecting the application of the petitioner on the ground of his being over age was on the basis of materials on record which cannot be interfered by this Court. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Board in keeping with the Government decision by an order dated 28.6.2007 had enhanced the maximum age limit for entry in the services 3 of the Board from 37 to 40 years would also not enure to the benefit of the petitioner, inasmuch as the said circular enhancing age limit for appointment was never sought to be given retrospective operation. Counsel for the petitioner then would submit that the petitioner had filed an application to the General Manager cum Chief Engineer, Bhagalpur Electricity Area, for condonation of maximum age limit in keeping with the circular/ policy of the Board which permits relaxation of maximum age in appropriate cases for the purposes of making compassionate appointment. In the considered opinion of this Court the said application was never meant for relaxation of age and in fact in that application the prayer of the petitioner was to apply the circular of the Board dated 28.6.2007 to the facts of his case. Thus, once it becomes clear that the petitioner had never asked for condonation of his age limit, the decision of the authority rejecting his application for compassionate appointment on the ground of his being over age cannot be held to be illegal. 4 That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/