IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.9841 of 2008 PRAKASH PASWAN, S/O LATE SHANICHAR PASWAN, R/O VILLAGE KUTHNA, P.S.BANSI DISTRICT ARARIA. .............Petitioner. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2.DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, ARARIA. 3.SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ARARIA. 4.SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ARARIA. 5.BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, RANIGANJ, DISTRICT ARARIA. ............RespondentS. ------------ 2 27-04-2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner claims appointment on compassionate ground on a plea that his father while working on the post of Chaukidar had died in harness on 28.04.2002. Learned counsel for the petitioner has supported such claim of the petitioner and in this regard he has submitted that the father of the petitioner was continuing in service and was aged about 57 years on the date of his death which was fully supported by the entry of his date of birth in his service-book. In the considered opinion of this Court such submission of learned counsel for the petitioner has to be only noted for its being rejected, inasmuch as, the father of the petitioner is claimed to have been appointed on the post of chaukidar on 27.07.1964, and yet his said service book allegedly was opened on 22.02.1992 and therefore, that by itself cannot be an authentic proof of the date of birth of the father of the petitioner i.e. 11.04.1945 as recorded in this belated Service Book 2 opened after 28 years or his appointment. As a matter of fact, the respondents in their counter affidavit have stated that the father of the petitioner on the basis of entry made in service records showing his year of birth of 1942 had already been made to retire from service on 30.04.2000, and as such after his retirement, he will not be entitled for getting his dependent appointed on compassionate ground. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner had tried to establish that the date of birth of his father was 11.04.1945 but then as the issue in this writ application remains confined to the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground and the respondents have come out with a specific case in the counter affidavit that the father of the petitioner had already retired from service and his death had taken place only after his retirement, and such averments in the counter affidavit has not been controverted by the petitioner by filing any reply/rejoinder affidavit this Court will have no option but to reject his claim for his appointment on compassionate ground. Additionally this Court has also found from paragraph no. 7 of such uncontroverted counter affidavit that the petitioner is a chargesheeted accused in Bousi P.S case no. 01 of 2001 for the offences under Sections 302/34/120-B IPC and therefore, the petitioner even otherwise is ineligible for being appointed on compassionate 3 ground in the light of Government policy contained in circular dated 05.10.1991. Thus for the reasons indicated above, this Court does not find any merit in this application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha ,J)