FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.2210 OF 2009 ------------------------------------:---------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Court’s or Judge’s orders. coram, appearances, Court’s orders : or directions and Registrar’s : orders. : ------------------------------------:----------------------------------- Mr.Jaydeep Pawar for the petitioner. CORAM: S.B.MHASE & D.B.BHOSALE, JJ. CORAM: S.B.MHASE & D.B.BHOSALE, JJ. CORAM: S.B.MHASE & D.B.BHOSALE, JJ. DATED: 12TH MARCH, 2009. DATED: 12TH MARCH, 2009. DATED: 12TH MARCH, 2009. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Heard. 2. The petitioner has been appointed as peon in 2004 on compassionate ground. Now petitioner claims that the petitioner be appointed as teacher with respondent on compassionate ground. Reason for claiming such fresh reappointment is that the petitioner possesses the required qualification for the post of teacher and that, the respondent is possessed of vacancies of teacher. It is well settled law that compassionate appointment is not a right of candidate but it is a mercy shown by employer to the family which has lost a bread earner due to mishap. In the present matter once in 2004 compassionate appointment has been given to the petitioner. Thus whatever the right petitioner was possessed that right has been exhausted by the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim appointment on compassionate ground. This right is not a perennial and/or continuous right so as to claim compassionate appointment whenever the vacancy is available. It is to be noted that while making appointment the employer may offer Class IV or Class III post as may be available. Employer is not bound to offer post as per qualification of candidate or petitioner. Therefore even though post of teacher are available with respondent, the respondent cannot give said post to the petitioner as a compassionate appointment. Those post will be filled on by regular recruitment procedure and petitioner as qualified candidate may compete with other candidates. But petitioner’s claim for compassionate appointment, second time is ill founded and without any merit. We therefore reject this petition in limine. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.)