D.G.R. Patnaik, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties and with their consent, this application is disposed of at the stage of admission.
(2.) ADMITTEDLY , the petitioner had, on an earlier occasion also, approached this Court with the same prayer for a direction to the respondents for grant of compassionate appointment. With certain observations, the writ application was disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned authorities of the respondents and with a corresponding direction to them to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with the Rules. It appears that the petitioner had submitted his representation but his prayer for grant of compassionate appointment was rejected on the ground that such prayer for compassionate appointment has become stale after more than ten years of the date of demise of the deceased employee.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner would argue that in response to the representation filed by the petitioner, it was the respondents who had given the assurance that his prayer is under consideration and it was only when they had finally decided not to accede to the petitioner's request some time in 2007, that the petitioner had the cause for filing this writ application.;