Honble LAKSHMANA, CJ.–This appeal is directed against the order passed by V.G. Palshikar, J. in the writ petition, by which the appellant/petitioner sought improvement of the position.

(2). The short facts are that on the death of the appellants father, who was serving as Senior Commercial Taxation Officer, Circle-III, Jodhpur, when he expired on 26.9.91, the appellants mother applied to the respondents for providing him appointment commesurate with his qualification under the Rajasthan Recruitment of Dependents of Govt. Servants (Dying while in Service) Rules, 1975 (for short `the Rules of 1975 hereinafter). According to the appellant, he is possessed of Degree in Science Mathematics and Post-graduate degree in M.A. English Literature when application was sent for providing him appointment in place of his father on compassionate ground. The appellant was informed that in view of the instructions contained in the letter dated 1.4.89, he can be appointed on the post of Commercial Taxation Inspector (Subordinate Service) and not on the post of Assistant Commercial Taxation Officer. The appellant was asked by the aforesaid letter that he may state whether he is desirous of being appointed on the post of Commercial Taxation Inspector or not. In pursuance of this letter, the appellant submitted his acceptance letter but under protest reserving his right to assail the validity of such action of the respondents. The appellant again submitted another application on 18.8.91 stating that Shri Ketan Sharma, Miss Anita Khatri and Miss Anita Mathur have been given appointments on the post of Assistant Commercial Taxation Officers under the Rules of 1975 and, therefore, they were appointed after the aforesaid instructions came into effect on 1.4.89, the appellant should also be considered for appointment to the said higher post. However, the respondents have denied the appointment on the post of Commercial Taxation inspector in terms of the guidelines of the above letter. Feeling aggrieved of the order dated 26.8.91, the appellant preferred the writ petition for the reliefs claimed thereunder.

(3). The writ petition was resisted by the respondents stating that the appellant himself had agreed to be appointed on the post of Commercial Taxes Inspector vide his letter dated 31.7.91 though after reserving the rights in this respect and that the appellant cannot now come around and say that he should have been considered for the higher post on the basis of his qualification. Since right to be considered for appointment on compassionate ground was consumated, no further consideration on compassionate ground would arise.

(4). Palshikar, J. dismissed the writ petition against which the present appeal has been filed.

(5). We have heard Mr. Mridul for the appellant and Mr. Sangeet Lodha for the respondents.

(6). Learned Sr. Adv. Mr. Mridul submitted that the appellant is possessed of Degree in Science Mathematics and Post-graduate degree in M.A. English Literature when application was sent for providing him appointment in place of his father on compassionate ground and the respondents instead of considering him for appointment to the higher post informed the appellant that in view of the instructions contained in the letter dated 1.4.89, he can be appointed on the post of Commercial Taxation Inspector (Subordinate Service) and not on the post of Assistant Commercial Taxation Officer. It is further submitted that the appellant being in dire necessity of the employment was compelled to convey his acceptance but he did so under protest reserving his right to assail the validity of such action of the respondents and, therefore, he submitted another application dated 18.8.91. Mr. Mridul further submitted that the provision for compassionate appointment has been made in the Rules in view of the fact that the family of the deceased government employee needs immediate succour on account of the loss of bread earner and in these circumstances, if the appellant acce

Click Here to Read the rest of this document