- (1.) The father of the petitioner died on 27.03.2005 leaving behind this petitioner who was minor, at that point of time, and the other minor brothers. The mother of the petitioner predeceased the father. At the time of death of the father of petitioner, petitioner was only 12 years 1 month of age. The petitioner after attaining majority on 26.04.2011, had applied for compassionate appointment before the authorities of C.M.P.D.I. The said application of compassionate appointment was considered and was dismissed vide communication dated 27.01.2014. The ground for rejecting the claim for compassionate appointment, as set forth in the order impugned is that the petitioner has applied for compassionate appointment after lapse of about 6 years from the death of his father.
(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is absolutely bad and cannot be sustained. She further submits that the petitioner was only 12 years one month of age, at that time of death of his father and as such her names should have been kept in live roaster and the respondent should have offered her appointment on attainment of majority. He further submits that this case cannot be termed as a belated one and hence, the rejection was unwarranted.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submit that admittedly, the father of the petitioner died on 27.03.2005 and it is also admitted that the claim for compassionate appointment was made on 26.04.2011 and thus, it is apparent that the claim was time barred and thus, the same was rejected.;