- (1.) THE defect as pointed out by the office is taken note of and is ignored.
(2.) AFTER having heard the learned counsel for the appellants and having perused the order impugned, we find absolutely no ground to consider interference in this intra-court appeal. The crux of the matter remains that the writ petitioner (the respondent herein) stated the grievance before the writ Court in CWP No.8279/2011 against rejection of his case for appointment on compassionate basis on the ground that he was not possessing the qualification for appointment to the post of Assistant Traffic Inspector or Dy.Store Inspector or Conductor or Driver but while doing so, the Corporation did not consider his case for appointment on Class-IV post. The learned Single Judge has, in the given circumstances, proceeded to dispose of the writ petition, of course, without notice to the appellants, with the following directions:- "In this view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for providing appointment as Class-IV employee on compassionate ground within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and pass an order within aforesaid period." Even if the writ petition was disposed of without notice to the respondents, the directions as issued by the learned Single Judge are only to the extent of consideration of the case of the writ petitioner for providing him appointment as Class-IV employee on compassionate basis. We are unable to find any such error or want of jurisdiction in the directions so issued as to consider interference in intra-court appeal. The directions, by themselves, hardly cause any prejudice to the appellants. It is rather expected of them, as agency of the Government and a model employer, to consider the matter in accordance with law. There being no reason to consider interference, this appeal stands dismissed.;