IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18238 of 2009 1. SHAILENDRA KUMAR SUMAN S/O LATE DEVENDRA ROY R/O MOH- BASERA COLONY, BARHARA ROAD, P.S. BAHADURPUR, DISTT. DARBHANGA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPTT., BIHAR 3. JOINT COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX DEPTT., PATNA DIVISION, BIHAR 4. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER INVESTIGATION BUREAU, PATNA DIVISION, PATNA 5. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE-CUM-CHAIRMAN DISTRICT COMPASSIONATE COMMITTEE, PATNA ----------- 2. 17.3.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The controversy relates to a claim for compassionate appointment. This Court does not consider it necessary to notice materials except to the extent necessary for disposal of this application while giving appropriate direction to the respondents. The petitioner has stated in the writ application that he applied for compassionate appointment within time and possesses the requisite qualifications. This Court in C.W.J.C. No. 7356 of 2009 directed consideration of his case which has been rejected on the ground that it was not clear on which vacant post his father had been appointed and whether reservation, roster etc. was followed and that his 2 appointment was in the disputed category. Learned counsel submits that the service book of his deceased father was opened and after his death the petitioner’s mother applied for family pension benefits and that she is getting the same. He relies upon an order of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 7771 of 2005 stated to have been affirmed in L.P.A. No. 77 of 2006 noticing the status of one alleged not to be appointed on a sanctioned post but whose heirs were receiving family pension in context of a claim for compassionate appointment. The order dated 18.9.2009 is therefore directed to be kept in abeyance in so far as the petitioner is concerned when the respondents are directed to re-examine matters in light of the judgment of this Court referred to above and then dispose off the issue finally by a reasoned and speaking order when the order dated 18.9.2009 shall finally merge into such fresh order passed by them. Let such be done within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)