- (1.) THIS petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of Constitution of India for seeking a Mandamus to the respondents to appoint the petitioner against the vacant post of Class -Ill on compassionate ground as the father of the petitioner died -in -harness in the year 1991.
(2.) IT is not in dispute that the petitioner's father died on 5.5.1991 and he had been serving in the Government Primary School, Jilling Tand, Bengabad, District -Giridih, thereafter, the petitioner filed an application before the District Superintendent of Education, Giridih on 8.5.2006 for his appointment in any vacant post of Class -Ill as he has attained the age of majority, but his request was turned down by the District Superintendent of Education, Giridih vide letter dated 30.5.2006. The said order contains that the application has been received beyond time of five years, as such, his appointment cannot be considered. The counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. It is alleged in the counter affidavit that at the time of death of petitioner's father, the father has left his widow wife Kranti Devi, the son -petitioner and his daughter Khushbu. It was also averred in the counter affidavit that the age of the petitioner at the time of death of his father was 18 years which is further supported by the affidavit of the mother of the petitioner, which is annexed with the writ petition at Annexure -2 and it was also alleged in para -5 of the writ petition, also bears the same averments. The petitioner or his mother were eligible to be appointed as Class -Ill employee within five years as provided in the Circular of the Government, but neither of them had filed any application during this period. The petitioner has filed the first application on 8.5.2006 after the passage of a long period of about 15 years of his father's death. The respondents have requested to reject the claim of the petitioner.
(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parlies and perused the record. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was minor at the time of death of his father and he applied after attaining the majority of 18 years in the year 2006; the application could not have been rejected on the ground of limitation as the petitioner was minor on the date of death of his father. Learned counsel appearing for the State contended that according to the Circular, the mother has the first right to claim the appointment on the compassionate ground after the death of her husband. She never applied for the appointment in Class -Ill post in place of her husband. The family of the petitioner has survived for a period of 15 years; as such, the petitioner is not entitled to get the appointment on the said ground. The whole object of granting compassionate appointment is just to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis.;