JUDGMENT Shabihul Hasnain,J. Heard Sri Dr. Vijay Kumar Singh learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.K. Khare learned counsel for the opposite parties. 2. Petitioner has prayed for appointment under compassionate category within stipulated time frame. 3. The facts of the case in short are that the petitioner's father died on 19.10.2009 in harness. Petitioner moved an application on 23.11.2009. He was required to move an application in proper format which was also submitted. On the basis of this application the petitioner was interviewed on 4.5.2010. Later when the petitioner was not given any appointment he filed present writ petition on 16.1.2012 asking for the appointment? under compassionate appointment scheme. 4. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of opposite parties. In para no. 7 it has been submitted that at the date of death his father was 31 years of age. It has been submitted that in accordance with the existing service rules annexed with the counter affidavit the petitioner was not eligible for being recruited in the service of the L.I.C. of India. In these circumstances the respondents have declined to provide the advantage to the petitioner. In para no. 8 and 9 of the counter affidavit it has been submitted that legal heirs do not have any vested right under Dying in Harness Rules, hence, the petitioner can not claim any right through this writ petition. It has been further submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court has said that Dying in Harness Rules are based on discretion of employer keeping in view the circumstances in which help is needed to the employee. The opposite parties have annexed copy of the relevant rules on page 7 and 8 of their counter affidavit termed as Annexure no. SCA-1. 5. Rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the petitioner in which apart from reiterating his condition and the family circumstances has also argued on the position of law. In para 8 and 9 of the rejoinder affidavit the petitioner has accepted that there is Life Insurance Corporation Staff Regulations, 1960 which has been annexed by the opposite parties as Annexure. 6. Petitioner has also mentioned that father of the petitioner was the only bread-earner of the family. who is survived by the wife (mother of the petitioner), three brothers of the petitioner of whom one has passed away in the year 2011 leaving behind three sons. 6. Petitioner has also mentioned that father of the petitioner was the only bread-earner of the family. who is survived by the wife (mother of the petitioner), three brothers of the petitioner of whom one has passed away in the year 2011 leaving behind three sons. The second brother of the petitioner also has three children and the third brother has one child but he has settled himself in Delhi. The petitioner has also one child who is of two years. The mother of the petitioner and the entire family is in deep distress both psychologically and financially. There are total 13 members leaving the family of the brother settled at Delhi. 7. At the moment the petitioner has argued and referred to the said Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960. At serial no. 2 of the table which has been shown in the counter affidavit it has been written "son or unmarried daughter of an employee who dies while in service". Against this column the age has been shown as 30 years. After this table a proviso has been added which is quoted here below: Provided further that the Executive Director (Personnel) in respect to appointment to posts in Class III and IV, Managing Director in respect of appointment to posts in Class II and Assistant Administrative Officer, Assistant Branch Manager in Class I, Chairman in respect of appointment to posts in the cadre of Administrative Officer / Branch Manager or equivalent cadre and the Corporation in respect of appointment to posts in other cadres may relax or waive the limit on upper age wherever necessary. 8. Petitioner has argued that the power to relax the age is vested with the Executive Director (Personnel) in the case of the petitioner. He submits that it is of-course not his right that this discretion may be exercised in his favour but at the same time he insists that power which has been vested with the employer should be exercised and the discretion given to the authority should be used keeping in view that L.I.C. is discharging public functions. It should behave like a model employer. India is a democratic republic and a welfare State. The Constitution has guaranteed? social values for its citizens. It is the Constitution which has been given by us to ourselves. Governments are elected by individual. It should behave like a model employer. India is a democratic republic and a welfare State. The Constitution has guaranteed? social values for its citizens. It is the Constitution which has been given by us to ourselves. Governments are elected by individual. The State is represented through a government which is elected by the people for the people. Laws are enacted keeping in view the guidelines given in the Constitution. Any discretionary power vested with the authority has to be exercised keeping in view the laudable goals and objectives given in the preamble. The petitioner is also a unit of this country. Democracy is a system where, even the last person of the society is entitled to elect a government and bring in a system which will be based on equity and equal protection of laws. Legislature is vested with the power and duties to ensure that laws are framed for the benefit of the people. 9. In such a situation, if law provides for any such relaxation it should be used benevolently in favour of the needy person and specially in the case where the bread earner has been taken away from the family by the cruel hands of death. Death is one such truth which may befall on any person small or big, rich or poor, young or old irrespective of caste, creed, sex or religion. Death can not be avoided but the pain which it inflicts can be diluted by the compassionate behaviour of the people who are running the instrumentality of the State. 10. The petition is disposed of with the direction to the opposite party and specially the Executive Director ( Personnel) to look into the matter and consider the case of the petitioner compassionately keeping in view the observations of the court. The matter may be decided by him expeditiously within a maximum period of two months.