P. B. Bajanthri, J.—The matter is heard via video conferencing due to circumstances prevailing on account of the COVID-19 pandemic.

2. In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following relief/reliefs:—

“That this writ application is being filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of “Mandamus” commanding and directing the respondents authorities to make compassionate appointment of the petitioner, on the post of his deceased Mother who was regular employee of Nagar Nigam, Purnea and died during her service period.

(1/A) For issuance of other writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders for which the petitioner found entitled to.”

3. Petitioner’s mother while working as a Sanitary worker in Nagar Nigam, Purnea died on 04.03.2018. Petitioner’s father Shri. Laxmi Mallik filed an application proposing name of his son Munna Mallik that is petitioner for compassionate ground. The file was processed as is evident from Annexures A, B, C to the counter statement. Almost the petitioner’s name was cleared for issuance of appointment against one of the Group D post. Thereafter, there was a protracted correspondence relating to issuance of fresh guidelines for compassionate appointment vide letter 226 dated 03.02.2020 (Annexure E) of General Administration Department repealed the earlier circular while prescribing minimum qualification 10th (Matriculation or equivalent examination) for the purpose of compassionate appointment to the Group D post, therefore, the petitioner name has not been considered for compassionate appointment.

4. The dates are undisputed that the petitioner’s mother died on 04.03.2018. Application for compassionate appointment was submitted on 05.06.2018 as on the date of application i.e. 05.06.2018 the necessary guidelines is to be taken note of and not the guidelines dated 03.03.2020 (Annexure E) prescribing minimum qualification at 10th (Matriculation or equivalent examination), 03.03.2020 guidelines has prospective effect. In other words, the compassionate appointment claimed by any person subsequent to 03.03.2020, authorities have to insist pass in 10th matriculation. The respondents cannot insist that applicant should have minimum qualification of 10th (Matriculation and equivalent examination). In other words policy dated 03.03.2020 cannot be given retrospective effect so also it is not applicable to the petitioner’s case.

5. Having regard to the fact that petitioner’s mother died on 04.03.2018 and application was submitted on 05.06.2018. Apex Court in the case of N.C. Santhosh vs. State of Karnataka and Others reported in (2020) 7 SCC 617 (Paragraphs Nos. 9 to 20), it is held that for the purpose of examination eligibility criteria for compassionate appointment, the relevant date is date of application and the scheme of compassionate appointment/rules existing as on the date of application is required to be applied. Paragraph Nos 9 to 20 of the aforesaid judgement are held as under:—

9. While Rule 5, as it originally stood, enabled a minor dependant to apply within one year after attaining majority, the rule-making authority with the amendment effected from 1.4.1999 stipulated an outer limit of one year from the date of death of the government servant for making application for compassionate appointment. The validity of the amended Rules is not challenged in any of the present proceedings. Following the amendment, the norms clearly suggest that the earlier provision which enabled a minor dependant to apply on attaining majority (may be years after the death of the government servant), has been done away with. The object of the amended provision is to ensure that no application is filed beyond one year of the death of the government employee. The consequence of prohibiting application by a minor beyond one year from the date of death of the parent can only mean that the appellants were undeserving beneficiaries of compassionate appointment as they attained majority well beyond one year of the death of