IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.17152 of 2009 1. MD.AFROZ ALAM S/O LATE SHAMSUDDIN KHAN, EX P.A, CHAPRA, H.O. RESIDENT OF VILL- SUTIHAR, P.O- SUBHAR, DISTT- SARAN.---------------------Petitioner. Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, NEW DELHI CUM THE DIRECTOR GENRAL, DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, INDIA DAK BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-110001 2. THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL, BIHAR CIRCLE,PATNA- 800001 3. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDANT OF POST OFFICES, SARAN DIVISION, CHAPRA.------------------Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Binod Kumar Singh For the respondents : Mr. Shiv Kumar Mr. D.N.Jha, -- 3. 22.12.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. Petitioner was denied compassionate appointment by the authorities of the Postal Department on considering the assets and liabilities of the family and after making comperative evaluation with similar other claimants because only 5 % of the vacancies are permitted under the rules to be filled by compassionate appointment. The claim of the petitioner that the authorities have wrongly denied compassionate appointment to him has been properly considered by the learned Member of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench vide order dated 16th 2 February, 2009 passed in O.A.No.392 of 2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that at the time of death of petitioner’s father, there was one unmarried daughter also in the family but the learned Member of the Tribunal has committed an error in para-6 of the judgment in observing that family does not have a liability like education of minors and marriage of daughter. On carefully going through the averments made in the writ petition, it is noticed that in para-16, the averment is that the Tribunal has committed error of fact but there is no assertion that a daughter is still unmarried rather the assertion is that on the record of the case it is apparent that the deceased died leaving behind unmarried daughter. The death took place in the year 2001. Besides the aforesaid discrepancy in pleadings, para-3 of the judgment discloses that the departmental authorities were not oblivious of the relevant facts and they took into consideration all the relevant facts while rejecting the claim of the petitioner vis-à-vis other claims for compassionate appointment. The 3 petitioner has been found to be aged 39 years. In our view, this matter does not require any interference. This writ petition is therefore dismissed. ahk (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ) (Jyoti Saran,J.)