JUDGMENT B.P. Jha and R.C.P. Sinha, JJ. Heard learned Counsel for both the parties. 2. The petition is admitted and it is being disposed of at this stage. 3. So far as petitioner no. 1 Rizwan Ansari is concerned, his father was working as a constable in Bihar Military Police at Dhanbad. It is stated by the learned Counsel for respondent no. 1 that he died in September, 1984 (see paragraph no. 3) 4. The widow of the deceased filed an application on 22nd September, 1984 (see paragraph no. 5). It is, therefore, clear that the father of petitioner no. 1 died in harness. According to the Government Circular (Annexure-12), petitioner no. 1 is bound to be appointed by the Director General of Police, Bihar. 5. In our opinion, petitioner no. 1 has a legal claim to be appointed in place of his father on compassionate ground. We, therefore, direct the respondents to appoint petitioner no. 1 Rizwan Ansari in place of his father. According to the learned Counsel of petitioner no. 1, petitioner no. 1 is a Graduate. Therefore, we direct the respondents to appoint petitioner no. 1 to a post suitable to his qualification. 6. In the result, the petition of petitioner no. 1 is allowed. We issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground, as stated above. 7. So far as petitioner no. 2 is concerned, his uncle died on 28th March, 1984. His uncle, Gaurishankar Mishra was working as Sub-Inspector, Arms, at Gobindpur in the district of Dhanbad. The widow of Sri Gaurishankar Mishra applied on 19th April 1984, before the Inspector General of Police (paragraph no. 15) that petitioner no. 2 should be appointed on compassionate ground. It is also stated by the learned Counsel that Sri Gaurishankar Mishra also died in harness. We also direct the Director General of Police and other respondents to appoint petitioner no. 2 to a job, provided he is legally entitled for the job. 8. The petition of petitioner no. 2 is also allowed with the observations made above. 9. We issue a writ of mandamis so far as petitioner is concerned and direct he Director General of Police other respondents to appoint petitioner no. 2 on compassionate-ground. We also issue as writ of mandamus so far as petitioner no. 8. The petition of petitioner no. 2 is also allowed with the observations made above. 9. We issue a writ of mandamis so far as petitioner is concerned and direct he Director General of Police other respondents to appoint petitioner no. 2 on compassionate-ground. We also issue as writ of mandamus so far as petitioner no. 1 is concerned to consider the pase of petitioner 2 and appoint him if he is legally entitled to any job in accordance with law. 10. This petition is accordingly, disposed of. There will be no order for costs.