The purpose of providing appointment on compassionate ground is to enable the family of the deceased employee to tide over sudden crisis resulting due to the death of the bread-earner who had left the family in penury and without any means of livelihood. Such appointment cannot be made in absence of Rules or instructions and application for such employment must be made within the period prescribed by the rules/instructions. Application made at a belated stage cannot be entertained for the reason that by lapse of time, the purpose of making such appointment stands evaporated.

( 1 ) HEARD Sri Puneet Saxena, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Lalji Sinha, learned counsel for the respondents.

( 2 ) IN this petition prayer has been made for issuance of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Class-Ill employee on the compassionate ground and for issuance of any suitable writ order or direction at the pleasure of the Court.

( 3 ) IT appears that the father of the petitioner namely J. G. Shevdey while working as Head constable No. 410 in Railway Protection Force, Jabalpur Division and at the relevant time posted at Chibki, Allahabad died on 20. 2. 1989 leaving behind the petitioner and two sisters (already married) as the legal heirs. The petitioner made an application before the Divisional security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh) for getting appointment as Sub-Inspector on the compassionate ground. A letter dated 12. 5. 1989 was issued to the petitioner informing that the petitioner cannot be recruited as Sub-Inspector on compassionate ground, therefore, he was indicated to apply to the post of Class-Ill along with declaration of no objection preferred by his sisters. The petitioner made an application for the employment in Class-Ill category. He was also issued letter on 28. 11. 1989 for presenting himself before the Chief Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, Central Railway Bombay b. T. for interview on 12. 12. 1989 at 10. 30 a. m. However, on doing so, the petitioner was never informed the out come of the interview, again petitioner was interviewed on 31. 1. 1990. However, on 16. 7. 1991 the Chief Security Commissioner Railway Protection Force, the respondent No. 1 issued an appointment letter to the petitioner as Class-IV employee in Bhopal division. Subsequent letter on 16. 1. 1990 and 16. 7. 1991 were issued by the relevant officers. Similar letters were also issued on 7. 1. 1992 and 27. 7. 1992.

( 4 ) IN the counter affidavit it was not denied that the petitioner was not found suitable for Class-Ill posts. According to Para 10 of the counter affidavit the case was referred to DRM/jbp by the respondent No. 2 for appointment in Class-IV job along with all the documents, vide letter No. R. I. /jbp, dated 10. 1. 1989. The petitioner was called for screening on 30. 1. 1990 by the drm/jabalpur and he was found suitable for the psot of Hospital attendant by the Screening committee consisting three officers nominated by DRM/jbalpur. Accordingly he was directed for requisite medical examination and vide certificate No. 272145, dated 26. 2. 1990 issued by medical Superintendent, Jabadlpur, the petitioner was found fit for the post of Class-IV. The petitioner was given intimation by the respondent No. 2 regarding his result and sanction of competent authority for appointment in Class-IV post i. e. , Hospital attendant, same letter is annexed as Annexure No. 4 to the petition.

( 5 ) IT has also been indicated at the Bar that the petitioner has become now 37 years and the petitioner cannot be given employment at his stage as the need of bringing the petitioner and his family on the requirement of the family circumstances does not prevail.

( 6 ) THE object of compassionate appointment is to enable the penurious family of the deceased employee to tide over sudden financial crisis and not to provide employment. This is because as a rule appointments in public service should be made strictly on the basis of open invitation of applications and no other mode of appointment nor any other consideration is permissible. However, to this general rule which is to be followed strictly an all cases of public appointment, there are certain exceptions carried out in the interest of justice and to meet certain contingencies. One such exception is in favour of the dependants of an employee dying in harness and leaving his family in penury and without any means of livelihood. In such cases out of humanitarian consideration taking into