Ravi Shanker Sharma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.6238 of 2013 (3) dt.21-01-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6238 of 2013 ======================================================

1. Ravi Shanker Sharma Son Of Late Vakil Singh Resident Of Village - Jalpura, P.O. - Masaurha, P.S. - Paliganj, District - Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Department Of Home (Special), Government Of Bihar, Patna

2. The District Magistrate, Collectorate, Patna

3. The Deputy Collector (Establishment) Collectorate, Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 21-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The writ petitioner seeks a direction upon the respondents to provide employment in the Government as his father was killed by the extremists in the year 2003.

In the counter affidavit, the respondents have stated that on the death of the father of the petitioner, the wife of the deceased had made a claim for payment of compensation and on due consideration such payment was made. Several years thereafter, the petitioner filed a claim in 2009 for his appointment on compassionate ground, which was considered, rejected and communicated to him. Learned counsel for the State has rightly submitted that the said order is not under challenge in this writ

Patna High Court CWJC No.6238 of 2013 (3) dt.21-01-2016 application.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the case of some other persons, similarly situated, recommendations were made for appointment on compassionate ground. He has relied on Annexure 8 to the writ application. However, there is nothing on the record to show that in the cases of those, who were recommended any compensation was claimed, therefore, no inference of similarity can be drawn. That apart, as noted above, the claim of the petitioner was duly considered and rejected by the respondents. The order, rejecting the claim of the petitioner, is not under challenge. He has placed reliance on an order dated 1.5.2009 passed in LPA No. 860 of 2002, whereby the order of learned Single Judge was set aside (Annexure A to the counter affidavit).In my view, no such relief can be granted to the petitioner.

The writ application is accordingly dismissed. (Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) singh/- U