ORDER 1. In this case, there is a peculiar social problem between the parties. The petitioner is claiming a right of compassionate appointment on the ground that now he has become major and his father late Babulal had expired during the course of his employment in the Nagar Palika Parishad, Khargone leaving behind Respondent No. 3 as widow, the petitioner his son and five other children. Thus, there are six children in total left behind by late Babulal. The Respondent No.3, widow of the deceased Babulal, after getting appointment on compassionate ground, has remarried with another person leaving all the six children on road at the mercy of their grand-father Narayan. Now the petitioner is seeking a direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India invoking extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court that the respondent No. 1 and 2 be directed to provide him appointment on compassionate basis in place of Respondent No.3, on the ground that after her remarriage, she is not entitled to continue as she is no longer a widow and she has also left all the children on road at the mercy of their grand-father. The petitioner is also claiming the dues of Insurance, Gratuity and other arrears for the welfare of minor children. 2. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Circular issued by M.P. Government General Administration Department dated 10th June, 1994 is applicable to the employees of the Municipality Khargone According to this Circular, as per instruction No. 5 and 17 and other instructions, the major son of the deceased employee is entitled for such appointment and all these rules which are social in nature are meant for the welfare and benefit of the dependant children and members of the family after the death of the employee. As per Family Pension Rules, the widow is entitled to Family Pension only upto the period she remains widow and as per these rules, she will not be entitled for the Family Pension, on remarriage. 3. The submission of the learned counsel for the Respondent No. 1 and 2 is that they have nothing to do and they are ready to comply with the directions as may be issued by this Court. 3. The submission of the learned counsel for the Respondent No. 1 and 2 is that they have nothing to do and they are ready to comply with the directions as may be issued by this Court. The submission of the learned counsel for the Respondent No.3 is that the Respondent No.3 is prepared to keep all the six children with her and is also ready to maintain them even after remarriage and conversion of religion. 4. This is a social problem and it has to be sorted out in view of the analogous provision of Family Pension Rules as well as on the principles of equity and Social Justice. The executive instructions issued by the Government for compassionate appointment are for the benefit and welfare of the family members of the deceased. 5. On 21.1.98, the Respondent No.3 had submitted an affidavit to the Municipal Council that compassionate appointment be given to the petitioner in her place which is filed as Annexure-4, but subsequently the Respondent No.3 on 22.1.98 submitted another affidavit stating that earlier affidavit was obtained from her under pressure and the petitioner is the step son of Respondent No.3. Prior to the petition, efforts were made by the parties to compromise the matter, but looking to the remarriage, allegations and counter-allegations, compromise could not be materialised. In view of the second marriage of Respondent No.3 and due to involvement of a third person it seems to be difficult that the parties are in a position to settle the dispute. 6. I think, looking to the second marriage, it is not possible for Respondent No.3 and also her husband to maintain all these six children. There is no affidavit of the second husband of Respondent No. 3 and this is also not the solution of the problem. Now, since the Respondent No.3 has remarried, it is the responsibility of the second husband Sakir Khan to maintain Respondent No.3. In this case the main question is about the policy of the Government and whether under the said policy the Respondent No. 3 is entitled to get appointment on compassionate ground. The Government Circular dated 10.6.94 provides appointment to dependants of the family. Admittedly after remarriage she is neither the widow nor dependant, therefore, she is not entitled nor can continue. The Government Circular dated 10.6.94 provides appointment to dependants of the family. Admittedly after remarriage she is neither the widow nor dependant, therefore, she is not entitled nor can continue. Looking to the situation that six children are left behind by late Babulal, they all are minor between the age group of 4 to 14 except the petitioner, they are all on road at the mercy of others, the question of their life, bread and butter also cannot be overlooked. They have also a right to live, which is guaranteed by the Constitution of India. The counsel for the petitioner has assured this Court that the petitioner shall maintain all the remaining five minor children, if an appointment on compassionate ground is given to him. The welfare of minor children is the anxiety of this Court. 7. Thus, in view of the circumstances stated above, this petition is allowed and it is held that as per the Government policy, the petitioner is entitled for compassionate appointment by Respondents No. 1 and 2, being the major son of the deceased. Respondent No.3, because of remarriage, has lost, her right to continue in the employment as she is no more a widow or dependant member of the family. Therefore, on the basis of Government policy, the Respondent No. 1 and 2 are directed to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner in place of Respondent No.3 within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order on the condition that the petitioner shall maintain remaining five minor children till they attain the age of majority. However, because the Respondent No.3 is working as SAFAI KAMGAR, therefore, the Respondents No. 1 and 2 in case there is any vacancy of SAFAI KAMGAR available with them, may consider the case of Respondent No.3 for appointment, in accordance with law. 8. The petitioner is also claiming the dues of insurance, gratuity and arrears of other benefits as payable today which may be paid to all the minor children. The amount may be kept in the. Bank in the names of the minor children in equal portion by way of Fixed Deposit so that those minor children may get the fruits of interest for their welfare till they attain the age of majority. The amount may be kept in the. Bank in the names of the minor children in equal portion by way of Fixed Deposit so that those minor children may get the fruits of interest for their welfare till they attain the age of majority. This amount shall be deposited by the District Judge, Khargone in a nationalised Bank and the interest accrued thereon shall be available to the children for disbursement under orders of the Court for their welfare as and when required for a just cause. 9. With the above directions, this petition stands disposed of with no orders as to costs.