WRIT PETITION 6292 of 2025 on 5 October 1991

1. Md. Jahangir Son of Late Ansarul Haque @ Md. Ansarul, resident ofVillage-Chain Singh Patti, P.S.-Supaul, District-Supaul.Village-Chain Singh Patti, P.S.-Supaul, District-Supaul.

2. Zahida Khatoon, Wife of Late Ansarul Haque, resident of Village-ChainSingh Patti, P.S.-Supaul, District-Supaul.Singh Patti, P.S.-Supaul, District-Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, GeneralAdministration Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.Administration Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate cum Chairman, District Compassionate SelectionCommittee, Supaul.Committee, Supaul.

3. That Senior Treasury Officer, Supaul.

4. The Deputy Collector (Estab.) District Collector, Supaul.

5. Md. Umar Ali Akbar, son of Late Ansarul Haque, resident of Village-ChainSingh Patti, P.S.-Supaul, District-Supaul.Singh Patti, P.S.-Supaul, District-Supaul.

6. Kanija Khatoon, wife of Late Ansarul Haque, resident of Village-ChainSingh Patti, P.S.-Supaul, District-Supaul.Singh Patti, P.S.-Supaul, District-Supaul.

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================Appearance :For the Petitioner/s: Mr. Md. Musowir, Advocate For the Respondent/s: Mr. Government Pleader (04)======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMANORAL ORDER

28-04-2025 Learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State are present.

2. The present writ petition has been filed by thepetitioners for quashing of the part of the decision dated09.03.2024 communicated vide Memo No.212-2 dated09.03.2024, by which respondent No.2 has rejected the claim ofpetitioner No.1 for appointment on compassionate ground sincethere is lack of consent between petitioner No.2 and respondent No.6. Further prayer to direct the respondents to consider thecase of petitioner No.1 in accordance with the policy decisionsdated 05.10.1991 as well as dated 13.07.2022, since the fatherof the petitioner died in harness on 05.12.2021 from the post ofClerk.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that thefather of petitioner No.1 entered into two marriages and both thewives and their sons and daughters are in conflict. It is due tothis reason, the authority has passed the order.

4. Counsel for the petitioner seeks relief from thisCourt to set aside the rejection order of the District Magistrate-cum- Chairman, District Compassionate Selection Committee,Supaul, and pass further direction to the authorities concerned toappoint petitioner No.1 on compassionate ground.

5. In the light of the submissions, it transpires thatthere are two wives and their children, appointment oncompassionate ground has to be made to only one and for thatconsent is require. Therefore, it transpires to this Court that thedisputes are between the heirs and legal representatives of twowives of the government servant, who died in harness during theservice period.

6. In this view of the matter, this Court is not inclined U

Mkr./-

to interfere in the decision of the District CompassionateSelection Committee as it is a private dispute. Accordingly, thiswrit petition is dismissed.

(Dr. Anshuman, J)