IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6176 of 2007 KUNDAN KUMAR, S/O RAJENDRA TURI, R/O VILLAGE-DHOSI, (RAJPUR), P.S. PIRI BAZAR, DISTRICT-LAKHISARAI. ............PETITIONER. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH DISTRICT MAGISTRATE-CUM-CHAIRMAN, DISTRICT COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT COMMITTEE, MUNGER. 2.THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MUNGER. 3.THE ESTABLISHMENT DEPUTY COLLECTOR, MUNGER. 4. THE CIVIL SURGEON-CUM-CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, MUNGER. 5.THE INCHARGE MEDICAL OFFICER, TARAPUR, DISTRICT-MUNGER. ............RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 01.04.2011 Heard counsel for the parties. Admittedly the petitioner’s father is still in service and therefore, the petitioner as per the Government policy dated 05.10.1991 would not qualify for appointment on compassionate ground due to the death of his mother. The Government circular to that extent is very specific and reads as follows:- lsokdky esa e`r ljdkjh lsodksa ds vkfJrksa dks oxZ &3 ,oa 4 ds inksa ij vuqdEik ds vk/kkj ij fu;qfDr dh izfØ;kA funs'kkuqlkj dguk gS fd vc rd lsokdky esa fdlh ljdkjh lsod dh e`R;q gksus ij e`r ljdkjh lsod ds vkfJrksa dks oxZ &3 ,oa oxZ &4 ds inksa ij fu;qfDr gsrq dkfeZd,oa iz'kklfud lq/kkj foHkkx }kjk fuxZr lHkh vuqns'kksa dks voØfer djrs gq, ljdkj us ;g fu.kZ; fy;k gS fd vuqdEik ds vk/kkj ij fu;qfDr dh izfØ;kvksa dks bl izdkj ljy ,oa izHkkodkjh 2 cuk;k tk;s fd ljdkjh lsod ds e`R;ksijkUr mlds vkfJr dks fcuk foyEc ds oxZ &3 ds dfri; inksa vFkok oxZ 4 ds inksa ij fu;qfDr fey ldsA bl mn~ns'; ls ljdkj us fuEukafdr fu.kZ; fy;k gS& ¼1½ fdudk p;u gks ldrk gS & ¼d½ vuqdEik ds vk/kkj ij fu;qfDr dk ykHk oSls e`r ljdkjh lsod ds ,d gh vkfJr dks vuqekU; gksxk ftudh e`R;q lsokdky esa gqbZ gSA ¼[k½ bl gsrq ljdkjh lsod mls gh ekuk tk;sxk ftldh fu;qfDr] Lohd`r in ds fo:) fof/kor dh xbZ gksA ¼x½ lsokdky esa e`r ljdkjh lsodksa ds vkfJrksa dks gh vuqdEik ds vk/kkj ij fu;qfDr dh tk ldrh gSA vkfJr ds vurxZr dsoy iq=] vfookfgr iq=h rFkk iq= dh fo/kok iRuh lfEefyr jgsxhA nÙkd iq=] nkekn] Hkrhtk vkfn dks vkfJr ugha ekuk tk;sxkA ¼?k½ vuqdEik ds vk/kkj ij fuEufyf[kr izkFkfedrkvksa ds vuqlkj muds vkfJr dh fu;qfDr dh tk;sxhA ¼i½ e`r lsod dh iRuh ¼ii½ iq= ¼iii½ vfookfgr iq=h ¼iv½ iq= dh fo/kok iRuh ¼M-½;fn ifr iRuh nksuks ljdkjh lsok esa gks vkSj fdlh ,d dh e`R;q gks tk;s rks oSlh fLFkfr esa vuqdEik ds vk/kkj ij fu;qfDr dk ykHk muds ifjokj ds fdlh vkfJr dks ugha feysxkA ¼p½ ;fn dksbZ efgyk ljdkjh lsok esa gks vkSj muds ifr fdlh ljdkjh lsok esa dk;Zjr ugha gksa] rks efgyk ljdkjh lsod dh e`R;q mijkUr muds ifr dks vuqdEik ds vk/kkj ij fu;qfDr dk ykHk izkIr gks ldsxkA (underlining for emphasis) Mr. Dubey, however, would like to explain that though, both the parents of the petitioner were in government service but they were living separately and the petitioner was residing with the mother as a result whereof the retirement benefits was also paid to the petitioner and not to his 3 father. Developing this aspect, he would submit that the aforesaid underlined portion of Government circular dated 5.10.1991 prohibiting the appointment of a dependent family member in case of either of the spouse be still alive and in employment cannot be made applicable in the case of the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court, staying separately is not the criteria under the Government circular for considering the case of a dependent of a government servant for his appointment on compassionate ground. The Government policy dated 5.10.1991 as underlined above which is the relevant scheme of compassionate appointment is that if in any family consisting of husband and wife both of them are in Government service and one of them dies in harness the dependent of such husband and wife would not get employment on compassionate ground. Such policy is also not under challenge in this case and therefore, merely because the mother of the petitioner was allegedly staying separately from the father of the petitioner will not mean that they had also ceased to be 4 husband and wife. Such relationship could have ended only if there was a an order of judicial separation or decree of divorce. In that view of the matter, as the petitioner is not eligible in terms of the Government Circular for appointment on compassionate ground dated 5.10.1991 this Court will have no option but to dismiss this writ application. It is accordingly dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)