ORDER

Challenging the order dated 14.06.2019 (Annexure P/1) passed by the respondent No.2 rejecting the candidature of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds, the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed.

It is the case of the petitioner that her father was working on the post of Assistant Surgeon and was posted in Khand Medical Officer, Samnapur, District Dindori. He expired during service on 08.02.2008. The petitioner was minor at the time of death of her father, therefore, her brother applied for appointment on compassionate ground. There was some dispute arose between the step mother of the petitioner, therefore, she filed a succession case No.10/2008 before the Civil Judge Class-I, Jabalpur. A succession certificate was granted in her favour vide order dated 24.06.2013. Thereafter, the mother of the petitioner made a representation with an application to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground alleging therein family pension is not sufficient to meet day to day expenses and looking to the present cost of living, the compassionate appointment be extended. The application was rejected on the ground that she has applied for grant of compassionate appointment after lapse of longer time and the same can only be considered within seven years of death of the employee. Therefore, the present petition has been filed.

It is the case of the petitioner that on the instructions issued by the respondents regarding getting a succession certificate from the civil court, the petitioner applied for the same and obtained a succession certificate vide order dated 24.06.2013 in Succession Case No.10 of 2008. Thereafter the petitioner applied for grant of compassionate appointment and the same is rejected vide impugned order without considering the fact that a succession certificate has been granted in favour of the petitioner by the civil court. Therefore, the present petition.

Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the respondents/State has supported the impugned order stating that the death has taken place in the year 2008 when the petitioner was a minor. Her brother was applied for compassionate appointment, but no action was taken by the authorities. The brother has not filed any writ petition before this Court. It is submitted that a succession case filed by the mother of the petitioner was allowed on 24.06.2013 and thereafter the petitioner has applied for her appointment on compassionate grounds. The application was rejected by the authorities on the ground that within a period of seven years from the date of death of the employee, the application should have been filed and considering the clause 3.2 of the policy dated 29.09.2014, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of compassionate appointment. It is argued that the compassionate appointment cannot be considered as a mode of recruitment, rather it is a compassion being show by the authority to the dependent members of a bereaved family to overcome sudden crisis which has arisen due to death of bread earner of the family. Therefore, the rejection of the application of the petitioner was justified as the order impugned has been passed after a decade from the death of government servant. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Undisputed facts being that father of the petitioner died in the year 2008 while in service. The brother of the petitioner although applied for compassionate appointment, but has never pursued the same at any point of time, meaning thereby, he was not willing to get the appointment on compassionate grounds. A succession case was filed by the mother of the petitioner being Succession Case No.10 of 2008 which was decided vide order dated 24.06.2013. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment. Virtually only a representation was made on 01.10.2016 i.e. after lapse of more than three years from the date of grant of succession certificate and after more than eight yea