The petitioner has approached this Court to appoint him on Class-III posts on the basis of the recommendation of District Compassionate Appointment Committee.

2. Heard the parties.

3. It has been submitted on behalf of the Counsel for the petitioner that the father of the petitioner was employee of the State Government and while working as Assistant Teacher at Middle School, Sahibganj died in harness on 28.9.2000. After death of his father, the petitioner made an application for appointment on compassionate ground before the respondents. The case of the petitioner had been placed before the District Compassionate Appointment Committee, a meeting was held on 25.8.2004 under the Chairmanship, Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj wherein case of the petitioner along with others had been considered and the recommendation was made to appoint the petitioner on Class III posts but the petitioner was not appointed on Class III posts rather he was appointed on Class IV posts.

4. The submission has been made on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner after immediate death of his father having no option, has accepted the offer of the appointment for which necessary formalities were fulfilled by the petitioner.

5. The grievance of the petitioner is that the case of the petitioner along with other candidates had been considered and all have been appointed as per the recommendation of the District Compassionate Appointment Committee, Sahebganj but the petitioner has been appointed on Class IV Posts.

6. The submission has been made by the petitioner that the case of the petitioner has been discriminated and action of the authorities are in the teeth of Article 14 of the constitution of India.

7. On the other hand, respondents have contested by way of filing counter-affidavit wherein the submission has been made that the appointment on compassionate ground is not a legal right rather it is very weak right in order to provide immediate relief to the bereaved family of the deceased employee. The Government formulated the case of the petitioner in terms of the said scheme. The case of the petitioner has been considered and accordingly the Government has fulfilled its obligation by offering to the petitioner on Class-IV posts.

8. Learned counsel for the respondents has placed reliance upon the circular dated 5.10.1991 wherein the condition has been given that after appointment on compassionate ground no benefit of promotion or cadre conversion will be given. Referring to the said condition, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that since the petitioner was appointed on Class-IV posts and as such he cannot claim to be appointed on Class-III posts.

9. From perusal at length, it is an admitted position that the father of the petitioner died while in service. The Government of Jharkhand formulated scheme for providing appointment on compassionate ground. The case of the petitioner along with others has been considered and on perusal of the minutes of meeting dated 5.7.2005, it transpires that the case of the petitioner along with others candidates has been considered and have been recommended to be appointed in Class-III posts. The petitioner although has been appointed on Class-IV posts but there is recommendation in favour of the petitioner to make appointment in Class-III posts. Although it is right of the respondent not to give appointment in Class-III posts with the specified reason but under what circumstances the petitioner was discriminated to all other candidates, who have been appointed on compassionate ground living apart the petitioner who has been appointed in Class-IV posts.

10. Although this court cannot interfere for issuance of appropriate direction on compassionate ground considering the fact that compassionate appointment is very a weak right but considering the fact that the respondent authorities have acted strictly in pursuance to the recommendation of the District Establishment Committee and accordingly all