ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Rule. Mr.D.M.Devnani, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of Rule for the respondents. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and with the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties, the petition is being heard and decided finally. 2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 30.07.2011, whereby his services as Junior Clerk-cum-Typist, on adhoc basis, have been terminated on the ground that he failed to clear the Pre-Service Training Examination in three attempts. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that his father was serving with respondent No.4 and died while in harness. The petitioner applied for grant of appointment on compassionate grounds. The request of the petitioner was accepted and he was given appointment as Junior Clerk-cum-Typist on adhoc basis, on a fixed salary of Rs.2,500/ per month. The petitioner joined service with effect from 02.02.2007. As a condition of his service, the petitioner had to pass the Pre Service Training Examination within three prescribed chances. He could not do so, hence, his services were terminated by the impugned order dated 30.07.2011. 4. Ms.Rina Kamani, learned advocate for Mr.P.H.Pathak, learned advocate for the petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner was granted appointment on compassionate grounds as the family was in dire straits and in great need of employment. Unfortunately, the petitioner could not pass the examination within the three chances that were given to him. He had applied to the concerned respondents for additional chances twice, which were given to him but he failed to clear the examination in those additional chances, as well. That, the petitioner was discharging his duties satisfactorily. The mother of the petitioner is aged and is not keeping good health. The burden of looking after the entire family rests upon the petitioner. Therefore, looking to the overall circumstances of the petitioner, and the .fact that he was initially appointed on compassionate grounds, the action of termination of his services is extremely harsh and therefore, the petitioner may be reinstated in service on a lower post, where there is no necessity of passing the Pre-Service Training Examination. 5. In support of the above submissions, learned advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a judgment dated 18.01.2013, of the Supreme Court in Brijesh Vipin Chandra Shah v. State of Gujarat & Ors. 5. In support of the above submissions, learned advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a judgment dated 18.01.2013, of the Supreme Court in Brijesh Vipin Chandra Shah v. State of Gujarat & Ors. in Civil Appeal No.735 of 2013. 6. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner, that as the case of the petitioner is covered by the said judgment, directions, in accordance with the observations of the Supreme Court, may be issued. 7. Mr.D.M.Devnani, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submits that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court, this Court may pass appropriate orders. 8. In Brijesh Vipin Chandra Shah v. State of Gujarat & Ors. (supra), the Supreme Court was dealing with a case wherein the appellant before it was appointed on compassionate grounds as a Junior Clerk as his father had died while in harness. In that case as well, the appellant could not clear the Pre-Service Training Examination within three chances and was given an additional chance but was unable to pass the examination in that chance, as well. This led to the termination of the services of the appellant therein. After having considered the entire matter, the Supreme Court held as below: “7. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant submits that having worked for about 12 years, the appellant cannot now be rendered jobless. Even though he is not entitled to a Class III post, he would be certainly entitled to a Class IV post on compassionate grounds. He, therefore, prays that the appellant may be permitted to continue on Class IV post. However, this request is vehemently opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents and he submits that once the appellant had been appointed on Class III post, he cannot be considered for regularising his service on a Class IV post. 8. We are of the considered opinion that the stand taken by the respondents is unnecessarily harsh. It must be remembered that the appellant was initially appointed on compassionate grounds as his father had died while he was in service. Compassionate appointment is made by relaxation of the normal service rules for providing immediate financial assistance to the family of the deceased who dies in harness. It is unfortunate that the appellant was unable to pass the inservice examination so as to enable him to continue on a Class III post. Compassionate appointment is made by relaxation of the normal service rules for providing immediate financial assistance to the family of the deceased who dies in harness. It is unfortunate that the appellant was unable to pass the inservice examination so as to enable him to continue on a Class III post. But that ought not to result in depriving him of service altogether. 9. In view of the above, we allow this appeal and direct the respondents to appoint the appellant on a Class IV post. The appointment of the appellant on a Class IV post shall be from the date he was initially appointed on Class III post. His seniority shall be reckoned from the date of initial appointment. However, the appellant shall not be entitled to any backwages since he has not worked, on any of the posts, after the date of termination of his services.” (emphasis supplied) 9. The facts of the case before the Supreme Court are similar to the facts obtaining in the present case; therefore, the principles of law enunciated by the Supreme Court in the above quoted judgment would be applicable to the case of the petitioner. The petitioner herein has worked for five years as a Junior Clerk-cum-Typist and has been terminated because he could not clear the Pre Service Training Examination in three chances plus two additional chances. Considering that the appointment of the petitioner was on compassionate grounds and in view of the observations made by the Supreme Court in the case of Brijesh Vipin Chandra Shah v. State of Gujarat & Ors. (supra), similar directions can be issued to the respondents. 10. Considering that the appointment of the petitioner was on compassionate grounds and in view of the observations of the Supreme Court quoted hereinabove, the petition is partly allowed. The respondents shall consider the petitioner for appointment to a Class-IV post. The said appointment on the Class-IV post shall be considered to have been made since the initial date when the petitioner was appointed on a Class-III post and his service seniority reckoned, accordingly. It is, however, made clear that the petitioner shall not be entitled to backwages as he has not worked after the date of termination of his services. 11. Rule is made absolute to the above extent. There shall be no orders as to costs.