IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.412 of 1998 Parbati Devi, wife of late Jagdish Prasad Yadav, resident of Bura Nath Road, P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Bhagalpur. -------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Director, Science and Technology, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Principal, Bhagalpur College of Engineering, Sabour, Bhagalpur-813210. 4. The Secretary, Science and Technology, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. -------- Respondents ----------- 6 25.7.2011 Heard Mr. R. N. Mukhopadhaya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anis Akhtar, learned counsel for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order gives certain reason for cancellation of the appointment of the petitioner, which would not be applicable in the case of compassionate appointment, inasmuch as, such procedure enumerated in the impugned order is normally to be gone into in the case of regular appointment. In the considered opinion of this Court, such submission of Mr. Mukhopadhayay has to be only noted for its being rejected. The case of the petitioner for her compassionate appointment was placed by the Principal of the Bhagalpur Engineering College before the 2 State Government in the Science and Technology Department, which had, thereafter, referred the matter to the Personnel Department and the decision of the Personnel Department, having been against the petitioner, the same was communicated to her on 6.12.1983, wherein, it was held in no uncertain terms that the application filed by the petitioner for compassionate appointment was clearly barred by period prescribed under the policy then in vogue. In that view of the matter, continuance of the petitioner on daily wages after 6.12.1983 under any order of the Principal of the Bhagalpur Engineering College can be only by way of ad hoc appointment or a casual appointment but, at least not an appointment on compassionate ground. Thus when it was subsequently discovered the Director of the Science and Technology Department that the Principal, Bhagalpur Engineering College on the last date of his service prior to his retirement had sought to absorb five of the persons including the petitioner in regular service, the consequential decision taken for 3 canceling such illegal action of the Principal of the college dated 31.12.1988 cannot be faulted either on fact or in law. That being so, this Court would not find any anomaly in the reasoning given by the Director, Science and Technology in the impugned order and, to that extent, the challenge of the petitioner to such impugned order must fail. This Court would, however, find that the petitioner has continued in service for almost eleven years i.e. from 29.4.1981 to 26.5.1992 with some interruptions but then she was carrying the burden of the deceased employee. In that view of the matter, if there be any prospect for engaging her again even on daily wages or in any other way and if the petitioner is still in need of such help and/or compassion on account of the persisting liability of the deceased employee, the Director of the Science and Technology Department may direct for engaging her in service but if there be no vacant sanctioned post or even a prospect for engaging her even on daily wages or that the 4 petitioner no longer would be of any use on account of advanced age, the Director may straightway reject the case by giving his reasons. In order to expedite this exercise, this Court would give liberty to the petitioner to file her self-contained representation and it is expected that the Director will take his decision as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date filing of such representation. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)