- (1.) HEARD .
(2.) THE petitioner has prayed for quashing the order by which his representation for appointing him in class III post has been rejected by the Establishment Committee. The petitioner was appointed in class IV post on compassionate ground in the year, 1987. The case of the petitioner is that in 1987 his qualification was intermediate. However, after passing the qualifying examination he made representation to the respondents for appointing him in class III post. It is contended that other similarly situated persons who were appointed on compassionate ground in class IV post, have been appointed in class III post after considering their representations.
(3.) IT is well settled that the object of appointment on compassionate ground is nothing but to give immediate relief to the dependants and to save them from starvation. The right of dependants who get compassionate appointment is neither legal nor constitutional, rather, it flows from the policy decision of the Government. The question raised by the petitioner has been set at rest by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Rajasthan vs. Umrao Singh reported in 1994 (6) SCC, 561. The Supreme Court held that a person once appointed in class IV post on compassionate ground cannot subsequently claim his appointment on higher post.;