JUDGMENT Ritu Raj Awasthi, J. -- The case is listed in the cause list under the heading "Oldest cases and/or cases classified as likely to be infructuous". 2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and perused the records. 3. This writ petition was filed in the year 2004, challenging the impugned order dated 4.3.2004 whereby representation of the petitioner for compassionate appointment has been rejected by the opposite party no. 1. The petitioner has also prayed for direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground under the scheme for compassionate appointment. 4. As per the facts of the case, the father of petitioner had died while working as Godown Durban on 20.3.1999. The mother of the petitioner had moved an application on 13.9.2003 to consider her son, the petitioner for compassionate appointment. The said application remained pending. The mother of the petitioner feeling aggrieved had filed a Writ Petition No. 50839 (S/S) of 2003 which was disposed of with direction to opposite parties to consider and decide petitioner's representation as expeditiously as possible preferably within three months. It was thereafter that the claim of petitioner was considered and rejected by the impugned order dated 4.3.2004. 5. The order impugned clearly indicates that as per the scheme for appointment on compassionate ground for dependents of the deceased employee/employees the application for being considered for appointment on compassionate ground should be submitted within one year from the date of the death of the employee. In the present case the date of death was 20.3.1999 whereas the application was made on 13.9.2003 by Smt. Rama Devi which was delayed for more than four years without giving any reason. 6. The competent authority has come to the conclusion that as the death has taken place more than four years back from the date of application, as such the said application cannot be entertained and even otherwise also at this stage it cannot be said that there exists any sudden crisis in the family to warrant compassionate appointment. 7. It is also to be noted that even as per the said scheme, the dependents of an employee who has died or who has retired on health grounds and whose service record was blemished on account of disciplinary action having been taken against him will be ineligible for compassionate appointment in the Bank. 7. It is also to be noted that even as per the said scheme, the dependents of an employee who has died or who has retired on health grounds and whose service record was blemished on account of disciplinary action having been taken against him will be ineligible for compassionate appointment in the Bank. Late Ram Naresh father of the petitioner was proceeded against deparmentally for major misconduct while he was posted at Kanpur Main Branch and on conclusion of the inquiry proceedings charges against him stood proved and penalty of stoppage of two increments in his scale of pay was imposed upon him on 12.8.1977. As such the application for compassionate appointment cannot be accepted. 8. Learned counsel for petitioner in support of his submissions has relied on the judgment of this Court in the case of Sharad Chandra Singh v. State Bank of India & others; 2010 (28) LCD 277 , wherein the Court has held that the competent authority has not applied its mind to the fact that the income earned by the family shall not be sufficient to meet the immediate needs of the family and the decision taken in this regard as such is not sustainable. 9. The petitioner has also relied on the judgment of this Court in the case of Allahabad Bank Staff Association and others v. Chairman and M.D., Allahabad Bank, H.O.Kolkata and others; (2010) 2 UPLBEC 1030 , wherein this Court has held that at the time when the petitioner had applied in the year 2002-2003, the scheme providing compassionate appointment was very much in force. The circular dated 4.2.2005 issued by the Bank w.e.f. 18.12.2004 providing ex gratia payment in lieu of right of compassionate appointment would not be applicable as at the relevant time the scheme providing compassionate appointment was in force. 10. The aforesaid judgments would not be of any help to the petitioner as the reasons to refuse the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground as given in the impugned order do not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. 11. Purpose of compassionate appointment is to provide immediate employment to one of the family member of the deceased employee. The father of the petitioner had died in the year 1999. In case the petitioner has not been given compassionate appointment, he cannot be considered and provided compassionate appointment at this stage after so much delay. 11. Purpose of compassionate appointment is to provide immediate employment to one of the family member of the deceased employee. The father of the petitioner had died in the year 1999. In case the petitioner has not been given compassionate appointment, he cannot be considered and provided compassionate appointment at this stage after so much delay. As such,no interference is required by this Court at this stage. 12. The writ petition is dismissed. Petition Dismissed.