JUDGMENT :

I.A. No.5910 of 2022

This interlocutory application has been preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 238 days in preferring this Letters Patent Appeal.

2. Heard.

3. No counter affidavit has been filed opposing the prayer for condoning the delay.

4. Having regard to the averments made in this application, we are of the view that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the period of limitation.

5. Accordingly, I.A.No.5910 of 2022 is allowed and delay of 238 days in preferring the appeal is condoned.

L.P.A. No.65 of 2022

6. With the consent of the parties, the matter has been heard on merit today itself.

7. The instant intra-court appeal preferred under Clause-10 of Letters Patent is directed against the order/judgment dated 14.06.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No.1263 of 2017, by which, the order dated 04.02.2017 passed by the District Compassionate Committee, Koderma, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for appointment on compassionate ground to be granted in favour of the writ petitioner was rejected, has been refused to be interfered with while dismissing the writ petition.

8. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition, required to be enumerated, are as hereunder:- It is the case of the writ petitioner that his father, namely, Gobind Ram was a permanent employee of State of Jharkhand and was working as Gardener at District Forest Office, Koderma. He died in harness on 05.04.2009. The writ petitioner applied for grant of compassionate appointment sometime in the year 2013. The said application was considered by the District Compassionate Committee on 01.03.2014. The Committee, after taking into consideration the fact that the writ petitioner was not matriculate at that stage, his candidature has found not to be considered for grant of compassionate appointment. Thereafter, the writ petitioner has made fresh application for grant of compassionate appointment, after completing matriculation on 22.10.2016. However, the said application was rejected on 04.02.2017 on the ground that his application is time barred, as the same was filed beyond 5 years from the date of death of his father, namely, Gobind Ram. The writ petitioner, being aggrieved with the order dated 04.02.2017, has preferred writ petition being W.P.(S) No.1263 of 2017 before this Court by agitating the ground that the rejection of the claim of the writ petitioner treating the application filed on 22.10.2016, after completing matriculation, cannot be construed to be a fresh application, rather the same is construed to be in continuity of the application filed by the writ petitioner in the year 2013. But, without taking into consideration the aforesaid aspect of the matter, the claim of the writ petitioner was rejected on the basis of the application filed on 22.10.2016 treating the said application to be time barred, which is absolutely unjustified decision. The learned Single Judge has also not appreciated that aspect of the matter in right perspective while dismissing the writ petition and therefore, the instant appeal.

9. Mr. Kishore Kumar Singh, learned S.C.-V appearing for the respondent-State of Jharkhand while defending the order passed by the learned Single Judge has submitted that the contention which is being raised on behalf of the writ petitioner to treat the application filed on 22.10.2016 to be in continuity to the application filed in the year 2013 cannot be considered to be a fit ground, reason being that, the moment, application filed by the writ petitioner after death of his father in the year 2013, whereby his candidature was rejected, since the writ petitioner was not matriculate which is requisite eligibility criteria to be considered for appointment on compassionate ground.

It has been submitted that the moment, application filed in the year 2013 has been rejected on the ground of non-eligibility of the writ