ORDER

1. The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 23.8.2024 passed by respondent No.2 whereby the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment in place of his father Late Mukesh Pandit has been rejected on the ground that petitioner has failed to file copy of the registered adoption deed for consideration of claim for compassionate appointment.

2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner is the adopted son of Late Shri Mukesh Kumar Pandit. The father of the Petitioner Late Mr. Mukesh Kumar Pandit S/o Shri Balkrishna Pandit was working on the post of Assistant Grade-3 under the Office of Development Block Education Officer, Tribal Affairs Department Dist Barwani. On 12.4.2022 the father of the petitioner Mr. Mukesh Kumar Pandit died while he was serving on the said post and the father of the petitioner was the sole earning member of the family. Subsequently, due to the loss of the father of the petitioner, the petitioner’s family became impecunious due to which the petitioner made an application for compassionate appointment with all the relevant documents including adoption document executed on the affidavit dated 12.1.2019. In accordance with the qualifications and rules and being the adopted son of late Mukesh Kumar Pandit, the petitioner was capable of being posted at Grade 3 level on compassionate basis. However, the respondents have not considered the adoption document executed on affidavit submitted by the petitioner instead the petitioner was asked to be present with the Registered Adoption Deed on 15.8.2023 before deciding the application else the Respondent shall take action as per the prescribed procedure and rules. The registration of the adoption deed is not mandatory as per the provisions of law and therefore, being aggrieved of the impugned demand of registered adoption deed and nonappointment of the petitioner on compassionate basis, the petitioner prefers this petition.

3. Counsel for the petitioner argued that aforesaid reason for rejecting the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment is contrary to clause 2.5 of the circular/policy dated 29.10.2024. This is second round of litigation. The petitioner earlier filed W.P.No. 25767/2024 which was disposed of by order dated 6.8.2024. The operative portion of the order reads as under :-

"In view of aforesaid submission, this Court finds that the impugned notice issued by the respondent No.2 insisting the petitioner to produce a copy of the registered adoption deed for consideration of compassionate appointment is illegal hence quashed.

The competent authority shall consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment in accordance with law without insisting for production of registered adoption deed within the period of three months from the date of filing of copy of the order by passing a reasoned and speaking order."

Despite the said order, the respondents have rejected the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment by impugned order dated 23.8.2024 again on the same ground that registered adoption deed was not filed. It is argued that the aforesaid order is contrary to the directions issued by this Court. This Court has already held that registered adoption deed is not requirement of the law under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act (in short the 'Act'), 1956.

4. Counsel for the respondent/State supported the impugned order and submitted that petitioner has filed copy of the affidavit on adoption (Annx.P/2) and from perusal of the affidavit, it is clear that when the affidavit was executed, the petitioner had already attained the age of 24 years and the said affidavit was only notarised. It is argued that as per provisions of section 10 (4) of the Act, a person who has crossed the age of 15 years could not have been adopted. On the basis of aforesaid he argued that as per clause 2.5 of the policy/circular dated 29.10.2014, in a case of claim for