(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)

1. Admit. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this appeal is taken up today for final disposal.

2. This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellants challenging the judgment and order dated19.4.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge, in Special Civil Application No.17541 of 2007, by which, the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition and directed the respondent authorities to consider the case of respondent afresh for giving appointment on compassionate ground on the basis of the policy prevailing on the date when application for compassionate appointment was made by the appellants. It was further directed that the authority shall take a fresh decision within a period of four weeks.

3. The facts of the case in brief are that, the father of respondent was working as a Watchman (Chowkidar) and he died in harness on 29.12.2001. On the next day of death, the respondent on 30.12.2001 moved an application before the authorities to grant him appointment on compassionate ground. The application dated 30.12.2001 was on a plain paper, even then the appellants on 28.1.2002 asked the respondent to submit documents as mentioned in the letter. The respondent submitted the required documents on 13.8.2002 to the Section Officer who forwarded it on 22.11.2002 to the Executive Engineer who in turn forwarded the application on 11.7.2003 to the respondent No.1. On receipt of the application and documents, the respondent No.1 rejected the said application on 13.1.2004 on the ground that the application has been made after six months of the death of the deceased and was time-barred as per Government Resolution dated 10.3.2004. The respondent made another request for appointment on compassionate ground which was rejected by order dated 18.8.2005 on the ground that the respondent did not possess the minimum qualification, i.e. S.S.C. as per the Notification dated 16.3.2005.

4. The respondent challenged the orders of rejection by means of Special Civil Application No.5994 of2007. The learned Single Judge by judgment and order dated 5.3.2007 remanded the matter back to the authorities with a direction to the appellants to consider the matter of the respondent for compassionate appointment afresh without being influenced by earlier decisions dated 13.1.2004 and 18.8.2005after considering Government Resolution dated 10.3.2000 within a period of two months, after considering the policy which was applicable at the time when the respondent had made the application for compassionate appointment. This order of the learned Single Judge dated 5.3.2007 became final and binding between the parties and it was not challenged by the appellants by filing Letters Patent Appeal.

5. The appellants have again, in spite of the directions given by order dated 5.3.2007, rejected the application of the respondent for compassionate appointment by order dated 20.6.2007 on the same grounds, namely, that the respondent has not made the application within the prescribed time limit and that he had not passed S.S.C. Examination.

6. We have heard Mr.Nirag Pathak, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the appellant and Ms. Vijayalakshmi, learned counsel for the respondent. Counsel for the respondent has placed before us the Scheme for compassionate appointment dated 10.3.2000.

7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has Vehe-mently urged that compassionate appointments are provided to meet the immediate exigency in the family of the deceased who died on 29.12.2001 and after more than 9 years, the appointment should not be granted. He urged that the application was time barred and the respondent did not possess S.S.C. Qualification notified on 16.3.2005.

8. On the other hand, Ms.Vijaylakshmi, learned counsel for the respondent has urged that the petitioner had made the application for compassionate appointment immediately after the death of his father and due to the fault on the part of the