CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Most. Bindeshwari Devi and Another vs The State of Bihar

Patna High Court · Decided on 19 November 1999 · Citation: (2000) 2 PLJR 95

HON’BLE JUDGES
N. Pandey, J
CASE NUMBER
C.W.J.C. No. 7708 of 1998
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 317 words

N. Pandey, J.—Learned Counsel for the Petitioners is permitted to add the Chief Engineer, Department of Minor Irrigation, Samastipur, as Respondent No. 7.

2.

Heard counsel for the parties.

3.

This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the Respondents to appoint the Petitioners on compassionate ground.

4.

It is stated that father of Petitioner No. 2 died on 3.11.1996 in harness. Thereafter, Petitioner No. 2 filed an application within time for his appointment on compassionate ground. It would further appear that the Compassionate Committee, after examining all the relevant materials, submitted a report before the Chief Engineer, Respondent No. 7, on 10.6.1997, a copy of which is Annexure-4 to the writ application, with a request to him that appointment letters be issued to the candidates, who have been selected, including Petitioner No. 2. but the matter was kept unnecessarily pending and nothing was done. Therefore, on 19.9.1997 a letter was issued by the Executive Engineer to the Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, that in spite of the recommendations, Petitioner''s appointment was not made on a compassionate ground. But it is alleged that nothing has been done so far.

5.

In my view, it was proper for the Respondent-authorities to appreciate that the policy of the State Government to make appointment on a compassionate ground, was adopted with a view to meet the immediate hardship the family members of the deceased government employee. Unfortunately, although the Compassionate Committee having examined all the relevant materials made a recommendation as back as on 10.6.1997 for appointment of Petitioner No. 2, but no letter of appointment was issued.

6.

I, therefore, taking into consideration the facts noticed above, dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Chief Engineer, Respondent No. 7 to examine these aspects and issue letter of appointment to Petitioner No. 2, forthwith.

7.

With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of.