JUDGEMENT : Heard learned counsel for the parties. W.P.(S) No. 6031 of 2016 2. Petitioner, Seema Tiwari claiming herself to be the legally married second wife of the deceased employee, Late Ram Babu Tiwari, who died in harness while working on the post of Assistant Teacher in Government High School, Koiridih, Deoghar on 10th April, 2012, has sought appointment on compassionate ground having made her application on 9th September, 2013 before the District Education Officer, Deoghar-respondent no. 5. She has also claimed pension and other benefits in lieu of the deceased employee. This petitioner has annexed matriculation certificate (Annexure-4), as per which she was born on 1st March, 1979 and passed matriculation in the year 1993. She has a daughter born on 24th April, 2000, who has also become major. 3. Counter affidavit and supplementary counter affidavit were filed by the respondent nos. 4 and 5 respectively. 4. In the counter affidavit in respect of plea of compassionate appointment, it is stated that one Vidya Sagar (petitioner in connected Writ Petition No. 1457 of 2017) son of deceased employee from his first wife had also made an application for compassionate appointment. District Compassionate Appointment Committee returned the file since only one recommendation would have been made by the respondent no. 5. In respect of claim of pensionary dues, respondent states that in the light of the order passed in W.P.(S) No. 6142 of 2013, Letter no. 870 dated 21st June, 2017 was issued and pension paper with all relevant documents were sent to the office of Accountant General. This however may not be completely true as it is evident from the order passed in W.P.(S) No. 6142 of 2013 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition) that this petitioner and dependent of the deceased employee born from the first marriage are fighting a suit for obtaining succession certificate before the Court of Sub Judge-VII, Deoghar being Title( P) Suit No. 12 of 2013. 5. The statement of the respondent no. 5 in its counter affidavit filed in the said writ petition has been referred to in the order dated 2nd July, 2015 passed in the said writ petition, whereunder the parties were directed to produce genuine succession certificate from competent Court of Law vide its letter no. 686 dated 27th August, 2012. 5. The statement of the respondent no. 5 in its counter affidavit filed in the said writ petition has been referred to in the order dated 2nd July, 2015 passed in the said writ petition, whereunder the parties were directed to produce genuine succession certificate from competent Court of Law vide its letter no. 686 dated 27th August, 2012. That writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the claimant to file an affidavit with necessary documents before the competent authority who would consider the case of the petitioner as well as other claimants keeping in view the relevant provisions of Family Pension and take a decision thereupon. 6. Respondent nos. 4 and 5 in the first counter affidavit filed herein have also made a statement that petitioner, Seema Tiwari is facing a criminal case bearing P.C.R Case No. 792/2012 before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar, where cognizance has been taken under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code by order dated 6th July, 2013 (Annexure-R/6-C). 7. L.P.A. No. 462 of 2015 was preferred by one Rupa Kumari respondent no. 7 in W.P.(S) No. 6142 of 2013 instituted by petitioner Seema Tiwari. Learned Division Bench by order dated 2nd May, 2016 dismissed the appeal. One more fact needs to be mentioned to complete the narration. As per statement made at Para-6 of her present writ petition, petitioner Seema Tiwari had solemnized her marriage on 26th May, 1998 with the deceased employee as per Hindu Rites and Customs at Baidyanath Dham Temple after the death of his first wife. W.P.(S) No. 1457 of 2017 8. There are certain defects pointed out by the stamp reporter which has not been removed as yet. However, on the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner defect nos. 4 and 5 are ignored. Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect nos. 1 and 3 during the course of the day. 9. Petitioner, Vidya Sagar, second son born out of the first wife of the deceased employee has sought compassionate appointment in lieu of death of his father in harness on 10th April, 2012 10. He has also made reference to P.C.R Case No. 792/2012, in which cognizance has been taken against Seema Tiwari by learned Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar by order dated 6th July, 2013 (Annexure-3). He has also made reference to P.C.R Case No. 792/2012, in which cognizance has been taken against Seema Tiwari by learned Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar by order dated 6th July, 2013 (Annexure-3). This petitioner was minor at the time of death of his father on 10th April, 2012 and had made an application for compassionate appointment after attaining majority on 11th May, 2016. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Vidya Sagar points out to the details of this petitioner contained in the application form at Annexure-7. His date of birth is 2nd October, 1998 and has passed the Intermediate of Commerce Examination. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his mother died soon after his birth. As per details of dependent of the deceased filled at Column 10 of the application, the deceased left behind one more son Devbarat Suman aged 27 years, daughter, Rupa Kumari aged 23 years apart from this petitioner Vidya Sagar aged 18 years and petitioner, Seema Tiwari aged 37 years, second wife and her daughter Richa Bharti who was 15 years at that point of time. This petitioner has not staked any claim for pensionary dues at this stage. However, it is submitted that the claim for pensionary dues is dependent upon the declaration of succession certificate by the competent court where all of them are parties. 12. No counter affidavit has been filed in the case of this petitioner. 13. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Vidya Sagar has referred to circular dated 8th August, 1991 and 1st December, 2015 issued by Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar and Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms & Rajbhasa, Government of Jharkhand on the subject of compassionate appointment. He has made specific reference to Clause-9(Ga) of the circular dated 1st December, 2015, whereunder no claim for compassionate appointment of any candidate, who is facing criminal proceeding of an offence punishable by capital punishment or six months or more can be entertained. Under 1991 Circular, Clause 2(Ga), claim for compassionate appointment of a candidate, who was facing criminal proceeding for the offences punishable by capital punishment or 7 years or more was not fit to be considered. Under 1991 Circular, Clause 2(Ga), claim for compassionate appointment of a candidate, who was facing criminal proceeding for the offences punishable by capital punishment or 7 years or more was not fit to be considered. According to this petitioner, claim for compassionate appointment of petitioner, Seema Tiwari is fit to be rejected on this ground since she is facing criminal proceeding for the offences which are punishable with a sentence of 6 months or more. 14. Relevant factual details of case of both these petitioners as borne from the record have been taken note in the foregoing paragraphs. Litigation relating to claim for post retirement benefits by the petitioner, Seema Tiwari earlier, in which sister of the petitioner, Vidya Sagar i.e., Rupa Kumari was also a party have been taken note of in the foregoing paragraphs. Considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties in the light of the broad factual canvass of their cases. This Court is of the opinion that the competent authority under the respondent State Government is required to take an informed decision on the claim of compassionate appointment pursued by either of these petitioners. Deceased was employee in a school in the district of Deoghar. The District Compassionate Appointment Committee is the competent authority empowered to take a decision on such claim. It is evident from the stand of the respondent-District Education Officer, Deoghar that the claim of the petitioners were recommended to the District Compassionate Appointment Committee earlier, but on account of inter se feud between two, no decision was taken. As per the applicable Rules and Circulars, if the claim of any of two is tenable in law and supposedly superior to the other there is no reason why an appropriate decision should not be taken by the competent authority. As such, this Court is of the view that the claim for compassionate appointment by the respective petitioners should be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law after due scrutiny of all relevant records including service record of the deceased employee, locus and identity of the individual petitioners. Individual petitioners are granted liberty to present their claims by way of a fresh representation before the respondent, District Education Officer, Deoghar, who on due scrutiny thereof, would place the matter before the District Compassionate Appointment Committee. Individual petitioners are granted liberty to present their claims by way of a fresh representation before the respondent, District Education Officer, Deoghar, who on due scrutiny thereof, would place the matter before the District Compassionate Appointment Committee. District Compassionate Appointment Committee on receipt of such application with observations/recommendation of the District Education Officer would examine the claim in accordance with law and take an informed decision within a reasonable time preferably 12 weeks from the date of receipt of representations along with a copy of this order. Since the claim of pensionary dues is dependent upon the adjudication of the matter before the competent court of civil jurisdiction on grant of succession certificate, no further observation is required to be made also in the light of earlier order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(S) No. 6142 of 2013. 15. Both the writ petitions are accordingly disposed of.