1. By Court Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.The appellant is aggrieved against the dismissal of his writ petition, being W.P. (S) No. 6295 of 2009, wherein the petitioner prayed that he was eligible and entitled to compassionate appointment on Class III post in view of the recommendation made by the recommendatory committee, who has recommended for compassionate appointment of petitioner including other persons on Class III post.

3.The learned Single was of the view that the compassionate appointment is not legally vested right and by which appointment, which has been offered and given and accepted by the writ petitioner, the petitioner can maintain his family and if he wants a particular post of his choice, he has to compete with other candidates applying for the said post and pass through various stages of a proper selection process meant for appointment to that post. The learned Single Judge also observed that the petitioner being merely eligible for the higher post cannot claim the said higher post.

4.It is not in dispute that petitioner was eligible for appointment on Class III post. It is also not in dispute that as per Rule the appointment could have been given