JUDGMENT : S.N. Pathak, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In the instant writ application, the petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to issue appointment letter in relation to the petitioner as his deceased father Alok Narayan Tiwary had served for 15 long years and thereafter, he had been duly selected in the selection process conducted pursuant to one advertisement published in pursuance of order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.2018 of 2006 [Abhay Kumar and others Vs. State of Jharkhand] and Civil Appeal No.2034 of 2006. By filing I.A. No. 506 of 2017, which has been allowed on 10.03.2017, petitioner has sought for additional prayer for a direction upon the respondents for providing compassionate appointment to him after declaring decision of the departmental selection committee dated 02.07.2011, as much it relates to case of death of deceased father of the petitioner, as immaterial and inapplicable consideration for the purpose of appointment of the petitioner to be made on compassionate ground. 3. The factual exposition as has been delineated in the instant writ petition is that father of the petitioner was working on the post of Technical Assistant at Lohardaga under the Frozen Semen Bank, Project/ Scheme who died on 17.09.2009 after serving employer authorities for 15 long years. After completion of 15 years of service, questions had been raised on the point of irregularities in the appointment of deceased employee and similar other employees. The said issue went up to the Hon’ble Apex Court who finally decided the matter in favour of Alok Narayan Tiwary (father of the petitioner) and other similarly situated employees and on that basis certain relaxations were given to them to participate in the selection process which was to be conducted by issuance of fresh advertisement. The case of petitioner’s father was also considered and he was allowed to participate in the examination and declared successful. Unfortunately, after publication of result, the petitioner’s father Alok Narayan Tiwary died on 17.09.2009. Petitioner being eldest son of deceased employee Alok Narayan Tiwary has claimed for appointment on compassionate ground in view of the fact that his father had served the department for 15 long years and had been declared successful in the final result before his death. 4. Mr. Petitioner being eldest son of deceased employee Alok Narayan Tiwary has claimed for appointment on compassionate ground in view of the fact that his father had served the department for 15 long years and had been declared successful in the final result before his death. 4. Mr. Saurabh Shekar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argues that act of the respondents authorities is contrary to the provisions of law and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel further submits that respondents authorities cannot be permitted to take arbitrary and unreasonable decision against a family who has lost their bread earner. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner’s family is suffering from acute financial crisis and are hand to mouth and there is no source of earning in order to maintain their livelihood. Learned counsel further submits that deceased employee has left behind four members including petitioner and petitioner’s grandfather who is aged 90 years. Learned counsel further submits that deceased – employee had served for 15 long years under the respondents authorities and on that basis, his case has been considered after giving relaxations in the selection process pursuant to the directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court. However, after publication of result, the petitioner’s father Alok Narayan Tiwary died on 17.09.2009 leaving behind the dependents as mentioned hereinabove. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner has also represented before the respondents for considering his case but the same has been rejected vide order dated 02.07.2011 and communicated to petitioner’s mother vide order dated 11.07.2013. Learned counsel strenuously urges that family of the deceased employee is facing acute financial crisis after death of their bread earner and further submits that order of the Hon’ble Apex Court in relation to appointment on compassionate ground is very much applicable in the instant case and thus, the petitioner deserves to be appointed on compassionate ground. 5. Per contra counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. Mrs. Chandra Prabha, learned SC-IV opposed the prayer of the petitioner and submitted that compassionate appointment can be provided to the family of those deceased employees who had been appointed legally against the sanctioned post. It is a clear case where the deceased employee Alok Narayan Tiwary was not appointed legally against the sanctioned post and, therefore, the request of petitioner’s mother for compassionate appointment of the petitioner was rejected vide letter no. It is a clear case where the deceased employee Alok Narayan Tiwary was not appointed legally against the sanctioned post and, therefore, the request of petitioner’s mother for compassionate appointment of the petitioner was rejected vide letter no. 1015 ni, Dated 11.07.2013. 6. Having gone through the rival submission of the parties and after perusal of record of the case, it is crystal clear and admitted fact that the Hon’ble Apex Court finally decided the matter in favour of Alok Narayan Tiwary (father of the petitioner) and other similarly situated employees and on that basis certain relaxations were given to them to participate in the selection process which was to be conducted by issuance of fresh advertisement and the petitioner’s father was declared successful. Unfortunately the petitioner’s father died on 17.09.2009 after his selection. It, therefore, transpires that it is not a case that petitioner’s father was never selected against the sanctioned post rather, he was duly selected against the vacant sanctioned post after following due procedure of law pursuant to directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court. It is a fit case for consideration of compassionate appointment of the petitioner in view of the fact that his father had worked for 15 long years and had participated in the selection process and after following legal procedures, was duly selected against the regular post. It also transpires that the respondents did not pass any order on the representation of the petitioner though the bereaved family needs compassion. 7. Be that as it may, considering the fact that the deceased – employee worked for 15 long years and pursuant to the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court, appeared in the selection process and was duly selected against the vacant sanctioned post, I hereby quash the decision of the departmental selection committee dated 02.07.2011, as much it relates to case of death of deceased father and further quash the letter no. 1015 ni, Dated 11.07.2013 and the respondents are directed to take a decision in the matter afresh with compassion as it was only due to delay and laches on their part that final order could not be passed and in the meantime petitioner’s father died. The respondents authorities are directed to pass a reasoned order within a period of four months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. The respondents authorities are directed to pass a reasoned order within a period of four months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. It is made clear that if the petitioner is found fit for appointment, a fresh order for his appointment on compassionate ground be issued within a further period of two months thereafter. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.