IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.509 of 2010 1. MUNNA KUMAR PASWAN S/O LATE DEO NATH RAM R/O VILL- BARKURWA, P.S. MOTIHARI (MUFFASIL), DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MOTIHARI, EAST CHAMPARAN 3. THE CIVIL SURGEON CUM CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER MOTIHARI 4. THE ADHIKSHAK SADAR HOSPITAL MOTIHARI, EAST CHAMPARAN 5. SAMPALI DEVI W/O LATE DEONATH RAM R/O VILL- BARPURWA, P.S. MOTIHARI (MUFFASIL), DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN 6. MALTI KUMARI D/O DEONATH RAM R/O VILL- BARPURWA, P.S. MOTIHARI (MUFFASIL), DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN 7. SONU KUMAR S/O LATE DEONATH RAM R/O VILL- BARPURWA, P.S. MOTIHARI (MUFFASIL), DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN 8. MANOJ KUMAR PASWAN S/O LATE DEONATH RAM R/O VILL- BARPURWA, P.S. MOTIHARI (MUFFASIL), DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN 9. KUMARI PRIYANKA D/O LATE DEONATH RAM R/O VILL- BARPURWA, P.S. MOTIHARI (MUFFASIL), DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN ----------- 02/ 12.05.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel appearing for the State. Petitioner’s prayer is for quashing of the order contained in letter no. 1715 dated 3.8.2009 passed by the Civil Surgeon –cum- Chief Medical Officer, East Champaran, Motihari, rejecting application filed by the petitioner for compassionate appointment. Petitioner’s father died in harness in the year, 2001 while working as Peon in Sadar Hospital, East Champaran, Motihar. After more than eight years of his father’s death petitioner filed application for compassionate appointment, which has been rejected by the Civil Surgeon –cum- Chief - 2 - Medical Officer, East Champaran, Motihari vide impugned letter no. 1715 dated 3.8.2009. The reason for rejection is that the mother of the petitioner Sampati Devi is the IVth Grade employee working in Sadar Hospital, Motihari. The District Compassionate Committee for this reason has rejected the claim of the petitioner. The Departmental of Personnel and Administrative Reforms in its resolution has provided the benefit of compassionate appointment to legal heirs of such government employees, who died in harness and after the death of the bread earner, there is no source of earning for survival of the family. In the present case the mother of the petitioner is working on a government post. This is the reason due to which the petitioner cannot claim his compassionate appointment. The other reason is that the application for compassionate appointment was filed by the petitioner after expiry of period of limitation, which is five years. Counsel for the petitioner submits that even though the mother of the petitioner is working as a government employee but he is entitled for compassionate appointment for the reason that the mother and father were separated in - 3 - the year, 1995, subsequent to partition in the family. Partition in the family, cannot be a ground for showing separation in between the husband and wife. Unless there is a judicial order to this effect that no matrimonial relationship exists in between the husband and wife, they cannot be treated as separated. On the basis of a Panchnama or any other document, the claim made by the petitioner is not entertainable. I do not find any merit in this application, it is dismissed. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)