Patna High CourtCWJC/204/2015dismissed

Baiju Kamat v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-01-19Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.204 of 2015 ======================================================

1. Baiju Kamat S/o Late Bholi Kamat, Resident of Village- Dhashara, P.O.- Ganpat Ganj, P.S.- Raghopur, District- Supaul .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Irrigation, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Irrigation, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Pramandal, Koshi Project, Saharsa

4. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Pramandal, Koshi Project, Saharsa .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhav Jha For the Respondent/s : Mr. AC to AAG-15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-01-2017 Heard Sri Madhav Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to AAG-15.

The petitioner claiming to be the son of second wife of a deceased employee, has approached this Court, invoking its writ jurisdiction under Article-226 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to quash an order dated 10.09.2014, contained in Memo No.1150 issued by the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Pramandal, Saharsa. By the said communication, the application filed by the petitioner for being appointed on compassionate ground has been rejected. The order impugned categorically indicates that the employee died in the year 1990 and the impugned order was passed rejecting the application of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.204 of 2015 (3) dt.19-01-2017 2/2 petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground purely on the ground of delay.

Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to persuade the Court that it is not fault on the part of the petitioner and the petitioner was approaching the authority concerned. However, the Court is of the opinion that the writ petition deserves to be rejected outrightly only on the ground that the compassionate appointment was being sought for in the year 2014, whereas death of employee had occurred about 24 years back i.e. in the year 1990.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. (Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U