JUDGMENT 1. 1. There appears to be a checkered history in the present case. The petitioner was initially appointed on the post of L.D.C. on compassionate grounds vide order dated 22.1.1985 giving relaxation in the qualifications. Subsequently after more than 14 years, services of the petitioner came to be terminated vide order dated 12.7.1999 only on the ground that he was not having requisite qualification for the post of L.D.C. The above order dated 12.7.1999 came to be challenged by the petitioner before the Tribunal. While disposing of the Original Application, the Tribunal gave directions to the respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment in Group-D posts. Again the Department refused to entertain the grievance of the petitioner on the ground that he has not submitted any certificate of passing Class-VIII, as such, could not be given appointment on compassionate grounds even on Group-D posts, i.e. of Class-IV employee. 2. The Petitioner approached the Tribunal by filing a fresh Original Application. The Tribunal vide order dated 18.4.2002 disposed of the Original Application with the directions that the petitioner should satisfy the Department that he has passed Class-VIII for getting a letter of appointment of Group-D post. 3. The petitioner thereafter submitted a detailed representation to the authorities concerned that after initial appointment on compassionate grounds on the post of L.D.C. in January, 1985. petitioner also cleared departmental examination held for promotion to the post of UDC from the post of L.D.C. That apart, he had also done Prathma in the year-1984, Madhyama in the year 1985 and even passed Uttama in the year 1989. The Central Government has recognised the degree of Madhyama as equivalent to graduation (sic). However, again representation of the petitioner has been rejected insisting him to produce a certificate of Class-VIII. 4. Though the issue of appointment on the post of L.D.C. on compassionate grounds is not before us in the present writ petition, however, once having satisfied the authorities that he had acquired recognised equivalent qualifications during his tenure of L.D.C., insistence on producing the certificate of Class- VIII, on the face of it appears to be wholly unreasonable. There appears to be total non-application of mind on the part of the authorities to deny appointment to the petitioner on Group-D posts. There appears to be total non-application of mind on the part of the authorities to deny appointment to the petitioner on Group-D posts. It clearly shows the pathetic adamancy of the authorities concerned, moreso, when the petitioner had served the Department as L.D.C. for more than 14 years without any complaint. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Respondents are now directed to give appointment to the petitioner on Group-D post within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Since the petitioner has been made to surfer because of arbitrariness and sheer apathy of the concerning authorities, respondents are further directed to pay a cost of Rs. 20,000/- to the petitioner within the aforesaid period.Petition allowed. *******