S.N. Paathak, J. - (1.) I.A. No.69 of 2017 Mr. Abhishek Kumar Sinha appearing on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that he has brought on record the rejection order dated 6.12.2016 in coporating in the order of the prayer portion of the writ petition by way of interlocutory application. Prayer is allowed as per the averments made in paragraph nos. 1 and 4 of the Interlocutory application. Mr. Dhananjay Kr. Dubey, learned Senior Standing counsel for the respondents has no objection to it. I.A No. 69 of 2017 stands disposed of. W.P.(S) No. 3429 of 2015 Heard the parties.
(2.) The present writ petition has been preferred praying, interalia, for quashing the order dated 06.06.2015 by which the claim of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Clerk on compassionate ground has been rejected.
(3.) The short facts giving rise to filing the writ petition is that, the father of the present petitioner was appointed on the post of Peon in Rajkiyakrit Gandhi High School, Palamau and he was in service from 1993 to 2004. From 6.12.2004 the father of the petitioner was absent from duty without intimating the respondents i.e about more than three years seven months. It is stated that the father of the petitioner had made representation on 02.08.2008 for rejoining the service. Again on 01.02.2010 the father of the petitioner made representation to the respondents District Education Officer, Palamau for rejoining his service. The respondents authorities forwarded the representation to the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi on 13.07.2013 regarding rejoining of the father of the petitioner in service. It is stated that on 07.08.2013 father of the petitioner died and the death certificate was issued by the competent authority. It also stated that service of the father of the petitioner was neither terminated nor he was suspended prior to 15.08.2013. After the death of his father, the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment on 29.12.2013 in a duly prescribed format. The petitioner made representation before the respondents and sought information about the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground. The petitioner was informed vide order dated 06.06.2015 that the claim of the petitioner has been rejected regarding appointment on compassionate ground, as he is not entitled for the same.;