PATHERYA,J. - (1.) In spite of service, none appears on behalf of the State respondents.
(2.) Let the Internet receipt be kept on record.
(3.) As the father of the petitioner died in harness on 8th April, 2005 and an application for compassionate appointment was made on 12th April, 2006, the same has been considered and rejected by order dated 20th April, 2010 on the ground that the family income of the petitioner exceeds more than the initial gross salary of Group-D staff. The said decision has been taken on the basis of the Notification of 2009, which can have no bearing on the application for compassionate appointment of the petitioner, as the Notification was of 2009 and the application filed by the petitioner was in 2006. In fact, the father of the petitioner died in 2005. Therefore, it is the prevailing Notification of 2005, which will guide the application for compassionate appointment. As the 2009 Circular is subsequent to the application and demise of the petitioner's father, the said Circular can have no application to the case of the petitioner and accordingly, the order dated 20th April, 2010 is set aside.;