JUDGMENT :

I.A. No.1163 of 2021

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This Interlocutory Application has been filed for condoning the delay of 7 days, which has occurred in preferring the present appeal.

3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances as mentioned in the application and also considering the facts that no counter affidavit has been filed, opposing the interlocutory application, by the respondents, we are of the opinion that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the period of limitation.

4. Accordingly, the delay of 7 days in preferring the present appeal is hereby condoned and this application stands allowed.

L.P.A. No.333 of 2019

5. The instant intra-court appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is preferred against the order/judgment dated 19.12.2018 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No.651 of 2008 whereby and whereunder, the claim of the writ petitioner, for providing him appointment on compassionate ground on account of death of his father in harness on 05.07.1998 while working as ‘Assistant Teacher’ in Hatia Para Middle School, Dalbhumgarh, District East Singhbhum, has been rejected by not interfering with the impugned order as contained in memo no. 904 dated 25.09.2007.

6. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition, which require to be enumerated, read hereunder as:

The father of the writ petitioner while working as Assistant Teacher at Hatia Para Middle School, Dalbhumgarh, District East Singhbhum died in harness on 05.07.1998 leaving behind three daughters and one son. After the death of the father, the elder sister of the petitioner submitted representation before the respondents authorities for payment of death-cum-retiral benefits as also for compassionate appointment but it did not evoke any response.

Thereafter, the present petitioner moved before this Court by filing writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 6199 of 2005, which was disposed of vide order dated 01.12.2005 with a direction to the writ petitioner to file representation regarding death-cum-retiral benefits as also for compassionate appointment before respondents authorities, who shall consider the same and pass appropriate order.

Pursuant thereto, the writ petitioner submitted representation before the respondents-authorities for appointment on compassionate ground which was rejected vide order as contained in Memo No. 904 dated 25.09.2007 on the ground that the application has been filed belatedly i.e. after lapse of seven years.

Being aggrieved with the order of rejection of claim of the writ petitioner regarding compassionate appointment, the writ petitioner again approached this Court by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein the learned Single Judge after considering the reasons assigned in the impugned order passed by the competent authority has refused to interfere with the same, which is the subject matter of the present intra-Court appeal.

7. Mr. Abhay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the writ petitioner has submitted that the learned Single Judge has not considered the fact that prior to rejection of the claim of the writ petitioner the sister of the writ petitioner had made application for appointment on compassionate ground but no decision was taken thereon. Thereafter, the writ petitioner approached this Court by filing writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 651 of 2008 and therefore, there is no laches on the part of the writ petitioner rather there is laches on the part of the administrative authority for which the writ petitioner cannot be blamed and left out to suffer. He further submits that the death of the father of the writ petitioner has occurred on 05.07.1998 and if the learned Single Judge would have consider the fact about making a application by the sister of the writ petitioner, the matter could have been different since the sister of the writ petitioner had