D.N.PATEL, J. - (1.) THE present writ petition has been preferred for getting compassionate appointment, because of the death of the mother of the petitioner, which has taken place on 19th March, 1998.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents submitted that much time has lapsed after the death of the mother of the present petitioner and, thus, the very purpose of compassionate appointment has been frustrated by now. Learned counsel for the respondents has relied upon the decisions, rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of U.P. V. Paras Nath, as reported in (1998)2 SCC 412; Sanjay Kumar V. State of Bihar & ors., as reported in (2000)7 SCC 192; and Santosh Kumar Dubey v. State of Uttar Pradesh & ors., as reported in (2009) 6 SCC 481. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I see no reason to entertain this writ petition, mainly for the following facts and reasons: (i). Much time has lapsed from the date of death of the mother of the present petitioner, which has taken place on 19th March, 1998 and, thus, by now more than one dozen year has lapsed. (ii). It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. V. Paras Nath, as reported in (1998) 2 SCC 412, at paragraph nos. 4, 5 and 6, as under:
(3.) SEVENTEEN years after the death of his father, the respondent, on 8.1.1986, made an application for being appointed to the post of a Primary School Teacher under the said Rules. His application was rejected. He, thereafter, filed a writ petition before the High Court. This writ petition was allowed by the High Court and an appeal from the decision of the Single Judge of the High Court was also dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court. Hence the State has filed the present appeal.;