JUDGMENT :

ASHOK KUMAR GAUR, J.

The instant special appeal has been filed by the appellant (hereinafter ‘the appellant’) feeling aggrieved against order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 24.10.2019, whereby writ petition filed by the appellant seeking compassionate appointment has been dismissed.

2. The facts, in the nutshell, are that the appellant claiming himself to be the eldest son of Late Shri Birdi Chand Saini (father of the appellant), who was serving on the post of Class-IV employee in the Corporation and died while in service, had submitted an application seeking compassionate appointment.

3. The appellant has pleaded in his writ petition that his father passed away on 29.01.2018 and the appellant's mother -wife of late Shri Birdi Chand Saini and one more son - younger brother of the appellant - Subhash Chand Saini, were the family members of the deceased employee and as such, the appellant having sole responsibility to maintain his mother and other family members, since had acquired the education qualifications of B. Sc. and M.B.A. in Human Resources, applied for compassionate appointment and submitted an application (along-with requisite formalities) on 22.02.2018.

4. The appellant has pleaded in his writ petition that the application submitted by him was duly supported by the affidavit of his mother-Smt. Santosh Devi and his brother Subhash Chand Saini, wherein they deposed that appointment could be given to the appellant.

5. The appellant has pleaded in his petition that the respondent-employer issued the impugned order dated 13.03.2018, whereby claim of the appellant was rejected on account of having more than two children. The impugned order referred to the circular/Notification dated 08.04.2003 and the circular dated 13.08.2004 issued by the Department of Personnel, Government of Rajasthan.

6. The appellant, while assailing the impugned order dated 13.03.2018, pleaded in his writ petition that the circulars dated 08.04.2003 and 13.08.2004 issued by the State of Rajasthan, were not applicable in respect of employment on compassionate ground to be granted in the office of Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation-Employer.

7. The appellant, in his writ petition, further pleaded that the employer has promulgated Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation (Recruitment of Defendants or Corporation Employees Dying While in Service) Regulations, 1983 (hereinafter shall be referred as the Regulations of 1983’).

8. The appellant has pleaded that the relevant compassionate Regulations of 1983 did not provide for any disqualification in respect of appointment on compassionate ground on account of having a particular number of children.

9. The appellant has pleaded that the Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation (Staff) Regulations, 1974 (hereinafter shall be referred as ‘the Regulations of 1974’) were also promulgated by the Employer and even while considering the cases of the eligible candidates in respect of regular appointment, there was no disqualification on account of having more than two children.

10. The appellant, in the writ petition, further pleaded that the impugned order though had given an alternate way of seeking compassionate appointment by the younger brother of the appellant-Subhash Chand Saini and as such, however the said offer of employment to th