High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Abhijit Kumar Thakur vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 September, 2011

Patna High Court – Orders
Abhijit Kumar Thakur vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 15 September, 2011
                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Letters Patent Appeal No.1231 of 2011
                                                   In
                             Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8558 of 2007
                 ======================================================
                 1. Abhijit Kumar Thakur S/O Late Uma Shankar Thakur, R/O Vill.-
                 Amaitha Panapur, Police Station- Karja, Distt.- Muzaffarpur


                                                                           .... ....   Appellant/s
                                                      Versus
                 1. The State Of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna
                 2. The Home Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna
                 3. The Director General of Police, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna
                 4. The Commissioner, Darbhanga
                 5. The Inspector General of Police, Darbhanga Range, Darbhanga
                 6. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Darbhanga Range, Darbhanga
                 7. The District Magistrate, Samastipur
                 8. The Superintendent of Police, Samatipur
                                                                          .... .... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s     :       Mr. Pramod Rajpati, Advocate.
                 For the Respondent/s        :   Mr. Prashant Sinha, A. C. to G. P. 1
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                           and
                           HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA
                 ORAL ORDER

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

2 15-09-2011 Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 1st July

2011 passed by the learned single Judge in above C.W.J.C. No.

8558 of 2007 the writ petitioner has preferred the present Appeal

under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.

Patna High Court LPA No.1231 of 2011 (2) dt.15-09-2011

2

The appellant, son of one Uma Shankar Thakur, a police

constable in the service of the State Government, seeks

compassionate employment on the ground that the said Uma

Shankar Thakur has disappeared since 17th June 1995 and has not

been heard of since then.

The learned single Judge has recorded three reasons for

holding the appellant ineligible for compassionate employment

and has rejected the writ petition. Therefore, the present Appeal.

We do agree with the learned single Judge.

Learned advocate Mr. Pramod Rajpati has appeared for the

appellant. He has relied upon the Government Circular dated 31 st

October 2008 and also upon Section 108 of the Evidence Act. The

aforesaid Circular stipulates that in case of disappearance of the

Government servant one need not wait for seven years, i.e. the

statutory period of seven years to presume a missing person to be

dead, to apply for compassionate employment. It further says that

in case of disappearance of a Government servant an application

for compassionate employment can be made two years after the

date of disappearance provided an F.I.R. for missing person has

been lodged and the person is not heard of. It is specifically

mentioned that in case of compassionate employment statutory

presumption under Section 108 of the Evidence Act will not apply.
Patna High Court LPA No.1231 of 2011 (2) dt.15-09-2011

3

In other words, the ward or the dependent of such missing person

can apply for compassionate employment after two years from the

date of disappearance. Necessarily such application has to be made

within the time specified under the relevant scheme. In the present

case on the date of disappearance of the Government servant the

appellant was a minor. By the time he attained majority and he

made the application, specified period of five years was over. The

appellant could not have been offered compassionate employment.

In any view of the matter, the question of compassionate

employment now, after more than 16 years from the date of the

disappearance of the Government servant, will not arise.

Appeal is dismissed in limine.

(R.M. Doshit, CJ)

(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

BTiwary/-