- (1.) The matter has been heard with the consent of learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing. There is no complaint about any audio and visual connectivity. I.A.No.9297 of 2019 This interlocutory application has been preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 28 days in preferring this Letters Patent Appeal. Heard. In view of the submissions made on behalf of the parties and the averments made in the interlocutory application, we are of the view that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in preferring the appeal within the period of limitation. Accordingly, I.A.No.9297 of 2019 is allowed and delay of 28 days in preferring the appeal is condoned. L.P.A. No.253 of 2019 The instant intra-court appeal is directed against the order/judgment dated 09.01.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No.6331 of 2017, whereby and whereunder, the learned Single Judge has refused to interfere with the decision of the authority, by which, the claim made by the writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground which has been rejected on the ground of over age.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are required to be enumerated which reads as hereunder:- The father of the appellant-writ petitioner, late Ram Padarath Thakur died in road accident while he was serving as Sub Inspector of Police on 29.06.2015 leaving behind two sons, one unmarried daughter and widow wife. The writ petitioner has filed an application before the Director General Cum Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand on 25.01.2016 for consideration of his case for appointment on compassionate ground against the post of Clerk. The case of the writ petitioner was recommended by the Senior Superintendent of Police vide letter no.1030 dated 05.02.2016 to the Police Headquarter for consideration of case of the writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground. The Police Headquarter vide letter as contained in Memo No.300 dated 29.02.2016 has directed the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi to proceed for consideration of case of the writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground. The Senior Superintendent of Police has recommended the case of the writ petitioner and forwarded it before the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi by making a request for consideration of case of the writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground by granting relaxation in the upper age limit since the writ petitioner on the date of making application was found to be over age to the extent of five years eight months and thirteen days but the Joint Secretary, Home Department vide letter no.4157 dated 28.07.2017 has communicated the decision to the Police Headquarter stating therein that there is no provision of granting age relaxation to the dependent son of the deceased employee in the matter of consideration of appointment on compassionate ground. The said decision has been challenged by the writ petitioner by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction conferred to this Court as under Article 226 of the Constitution of India vide W.P.(S) No.6331 of 2017 but the learned Single Judge has refused to interfere with the said decision of the State authority refusing to grant relaxation in the age of the writ petitioner, which is the subject matter of the present intra-court appeal.
(3.) Mr. Bhanu Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, the State authority ought to have granted age relaxation for the purpose of consideration of case of the writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground. He has relied upon a circular issued on 01.12.2015 by the Personnel, Administrative Reform and Rajbhasa Department, as contained in annexure-6 to the paper book which has been issued in supersession to the earlier circular as contained in circular no.13293 dated 05.10.1991 issued by the Unified State of Bihar, where the provision has been made for granting relaxation as would be evident from the contents of Clause-6 thereof but according to the learned counsel for the appellant, there is no reference for grant of relaxation to the dependent if the applicant is son and as such, it is totally arbitrary leaving the sons from the fold of granting relaxation, if the son of the deceased employee is found to be over age for getting appointment in the government service, in view thereof, submission has been made that it is a fit case where the appellant-writ petitioner being the son of the deceased employee, was required to be considered for grant of relaxation under Clause-6 of the circular dated 01.12.2015. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has further relied upon the provision of Rule 54 of the Jharkhand Service Code, 2001 which contains a provision of relaxation and as such, when the State authority has got power to relax as under the provision of Rule 54 of the Jharkhand Service Code, 2001, the same ought to have been applied in the case of the writ petitioner but having not done so, the great injustice has been imparted to the writ petitioner which has not been appreciated by the learned Single Judge and as such, the same is not sustainable in the eye of law.;