Hon’ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Shravan Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4.

2. Undisputedly, the father of the petitioner, namely, Sri Karori Lal was assistant teacher in Purva Madhyamik Vidyalay, Mani Kothi, Block Arva Katra, district Auraiya, who died on 18.6.2006, when the petitioner was aged about 12 years. The petitioner attained the age of majority in the year 2012. Immediately after attaining the age of majority, he filed an application dated 18.5.2012 before the District Basic Education Officer, Auraiya, respondent No. 4, for appointment on compassionate ground. The respondent No. 4 referred the matter to the State Government vide letter dated 18.6.2012.

3. Now, the impugned order dated 21.11.2017 has been passed by the respondent No. 1 rejecting the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has filed an application for compassionate appointment after expiry of five years. It has also been observed in the impugned order that earlier his application was disposed of by order dated 31.7.2013 and the respondent No. 3 was directed to communicate the order. There is no finding in the impugned order that the alleged order dated 31.7.2013 was served upon the petitioner or it was communicated by the respondent No. 3 to the petitioner.

4. Perusal of the impugned order shows that the respondent No. 1 has completely failed to apply its mind that the petitioner was minor at the time of the death of his father, i.e. the deceased employee and immediately on attaining the majority he filed an application for compassionate appointment.

5. The first and second proviso to Rule 5 of the U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying-in-Harness Rules 1974, as amended by the 11th Amendment Rules 2014, clearly provides that if the State Government is satisfied that the time limit fixed for making the application for employment causes undue hardship in any particular case, if may dispense with or relax the requirement as it may consider necessary for dealing with the case in a just and equitable manner. It has further been provided that the person concerned shall explain the reasons and give proper justification in writing regarding the delay caused in making the application for employment after the expiry of the time limit fixed for making the application for employment alongwith the necessary documents/proof in support of such delay and the Government shall, after taking into consideration all the facts leading to such delay, take the appropriate decision. For ready reference, Rule 5 of the Rules of 1974, which was amended by the 11th Amendment Rules 2014 is reproduced below:

“5 (1) Recruitment of a member of the family of the deceased—In case a Government servant dies in harness after the commencement of these rules, and the spouse of the deceased Government servant is not already employed under the Central Government or a State Government or a Corporation owned or controlled by the Central Government or a State Government, one member of his family who is not already employed under the Central Government or a State Government or a Corporation owned or controlled by the Central Government or a State Government shall, on making an application for the purpose, be given a suitable employment in Government Service on a post except the post which is within the purview of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission, in relaxation of the normal recruitment rules if such person -

(i) fulfils the educational qualifications prescribed for the post:

Provided that in case appointment is to be made on a post for which typewriting has been prescribed as an essential qualification and the dependent of the deceased Government servant does not possess the required proficiency in typewriting, he shall be appointed subject to the condition that he would acquire the requisite speed of 25 words per minute in ty