Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1861 (JHR)

Shailendra Kumar Pathak v. State Of Jharkhand

2018-08-14

SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

body2018
JUDGMENT Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - Prayer in the writ petition is for a direction upon the respondent-State to grant appointment to the petitioner on compassionate ground. 2. Petitioner''s father died on 27.01.2013. He approached this Court in W.P.(S) No.2448 of 2013 with a prayer for a direction for his compassionate appointment. The writ petition, however, stood dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 21.07.2014. This order records that in the last successive dates no one appeared for him and the petitioner was required to produce succession certificate from a competent civil court which he by that time did not produce and accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed. 3. The succession case filed by the petitioner is still pending in the court and while so, no direction for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground on death of the employee-late Parikshit Pathak can be issued. 4. Mr. Vijay Shnakar Prasad, the learned counsel for the petitioner, however, tries to impress upon the Court that post-retiral benefits on death of the employee-late Parikshit Pathak has been fraudulently received by the respondent no.5. In the first place, there is no prayer in the writ petition in this regard and secondly, only on the basis of a letter no such declaration can be made and, that too, by a writ Court. 5. In the above facts, finding no merit in the writ petition it is dismissed.