Babulal Mirdha vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 1893 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Babulal Mirdha vs The State Of Jharkhand on 22 January, 2025

Author: Ananda Sen

Bench: Ananda Sen

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                       W.P.(S) No. 196 of 2025
                                      -----
    Babulal Mirdha, S/o Late Dipti Mirdha @ Dipty Mirdha, R/o Village Daldali, P.O.
    Daldali, P.S. Hiranpur, District- Pakur
                                                        ------ Petitioner(s)
                                      Versus
    1.The State of Jharkhand
    2. Deputy Commissioner, Pakur
    3.Superintendent of Police, Pakur
    4.The Circle Officer, Hiranpur
    5.Officer-in-Charge, Hiranpur Police Station, Pakur ------ Respondent(s)
                                  ......
          CORAM        :   SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

------

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Suraj Singh, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Roy, AC to G.A.-III .........

03/ 22.01.2025: Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for

the State.

2. Petitioner's father died on 13.06.2009. At the time of the death of the petitioner's father, he was minor and his mother was under

impression as soon as her son becomes major, he will be appointed on compassionate ground. The petitioner approached the authorities for compassionate appointment on 13.09.2024, but till date no decision has been taken by the respondents.

3. The respondents rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that fifteen years have already elapsed, thus, no useful purpose will be served to grant compassionate appointment.

4. Compassionate appointment is granted to the family of the bread winner who dies in harness, to overcome the immediate financial crises. After passage of long period no compassion exists. In this case, today fifteen years have elapsed after death of father of this petitioner. The family has survived this long fifteen years, thus the very purpose of grant of compassionate appointment does not remain now. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. and Ors. Versus Anusree K.B., reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1331 has held that the whole object of granting compassionate appointment is to enable the family to tied over the sudden crisis. If such an appointment is made after a considerable period, the same will be against the object and purpose, for which the appointment on compassionate ground is provided.

5. In view of the aforesaid facts and considering the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the facts of this case where now fifteen years have passed since the death of the bread winner, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition, accordingly, the same is dismissed.

(ANANDA SEN, J.) R.S. A.F.R.