JUDGMENT Per Sureshwar Thakur, J. - The predecessor-in-interest, of the petitioner, namely one Surender Kumar, as, divulged by his death certificate, appended with the writ petition, as, Annexure A-1, died on 20.3.2006. At the afore phase, he was performing duties, as, a Forest Guard, under, the respondents. Consequently, since in contemporaneity, visa-vis, the occurrence of demise, of his predecessor-ininterest, the petitioner was a minor, thereupon, upon his attaining majority, in the year 2011, he applied, for compassionate appointment, in consonance with, the then prevalent apposite scheme, hence formulated by the respondents. However, the afore application remained not completely processed, rather, it became returned, through Annexure A-5, to the writ petitioner, for the latter, overcoming the recited therein shortcomings. 2. The writ petitioner, has uncontrovertedly failed to remove all the shortcomings, in his application, as became asked, for, to be removed, through Annexure A-5. However, yet, the writ petitioner claims, for, the issuance of a mandamus, upon, the respondent(s), for the latter(s), making his appointment on compassionate ground(s). 3. The legality, of, issuance of the espoused mandamus, upon, the respondents, enjoins an allusion being made, to, the apposite policy, as became formulated by the respondents. The relevant portion(s) thereof, are, extracted hereinafter:- "1) Policy:- The employment on compassionate grounds to the dependents of Govt. servants who die while in service is not to be provided as a matter of right. It should be given only in deserving cases where the family of deceased Govt. servant is left in indigent circumstances requiring immediate means of subsistence. The concerned Administrative Departments would satisfy themselves about the indigent circumstances of the family before appointment on compassionate grounds is made." Paragraph 2 of the policy provides for its applicability, in order of priority only to a widow, son or an unmarried daughter and in the case of an unmarried government servant to the father, mother, brother or unmarried sister. Paragraph 2(a) reads as follows: "2) To whom the policy is applicable:- The employment assistance on compassionate grounds will be allowed in order of priority only to widow or a son or an unmarried daughter (in case of unmarried Govt. servant to father, mother brother and unmarried sister) of: (a) a Govt. servant who dies while in service (including by suicide) leaving his family in immediate need of assistance." 4. servant to father, mother brother and unmarried sister) of: (a) a Govt. servant who dies while in service (including by suicide) leaving his family in immediate need of assistance." 4. Paragraph 4 of the policy stipulates, that, an appointment, on compassionate grounds, can be made, only to the lowest rung of Class-III and Class-IV posts, carrying a prescribed pay scale. Paragraph 8 of the Policy stipulates that requests for grant of employment assistance should be received within three years from the death of the government servant. However, where none of the children of the deceased government servant, had attained majority, at the time of death, the time limit for receipt of a request, for, appointment will be postponed to the attainment of the age, of, twenty one years, by the eldest son or unmarried daughter. Paragraph 8 is in the following terms: "8) Belated requests for compassionate appointments: Requests for grant of employment assistance should be received in the Deptt. concerned within three years of the death of the Government servant. In case where none of the sons/daughters of the deceased Government servant attain majority (age of 18 years) at the time of the death of the Government servant, the time limit for receipt of request for employment assistance in department concerned will be attainment of age of 21 years by the eldest son/ unmarried daughter. No relaxation will be allowed in entertaining requests beyond the above age except in the case of sons/ unmarried daughter/widow of deceased Govt. servants belonging to the difficult areas as laid down in the Transfer Policy. 5. Paragraph 10 of the policy, stipulates that the government has introduced a number of welfare measures, which have made a significant difference to the financial position of families of government servants, who die in harness. Hence, the policy stipulates that benefits received by the family, on the account of those welfare measures "may be kept in view" while considering cases of employment assistance on compassionate grounds. The policy proceeds to enumerate the welfare measures which, on the date of its formulation, were available to families of deceased employees. Paragraph 10(c) of the Policy, which has a bearing in this case, is in the following terms: "(c) The provision of employment assistance was introduced in 1958 and since then a number of welfare measures have been introduced by the Govt. Paragraph 10(c) of the Policy, which has a bearing in this case, is in the following terms: "(c) The provision of employment assistance was introduced in 1958 and since then a number of welfare measures have been introduced by the Govt. which made significant difference in the financial position of the families of the Govt. servants dying in harness. The benefit received by the family on account of these measures may be kept in view while considering cases of employment assistance on compassionate grounds. Such measures, in brief, which are at present available to the families of the deceased employees are as under: (i) Ad-hoc ex-gratia grant @ 10 times the emoluments which the Government servant was receiving before death, subject to a minimum of Rs. 10,000/- and maximum of Rs. 30,000/-. (ii) Grant of improved family pension. (iii) Grant of death Gratuity as under:- Length of service Rate of gratuity a) Less than one year 2 times of emoluments. b) One year or more but less than 5 years 6 times of emoluments. c) 5 years or more but less than 20 years 12 times of emoluments d) 20 years or more Half of emoluments for every completed six monthly period of qualifying service subject to a maximum of 33 times emoluments provided that the amount of Death Gratuity shall in no case, exceed one lakh rupees (iv) Employees Group Insurance Scheme:- Financial assistance to the family of the deceased Government servant as under: (i) Class-IV employees- Rs. 10,000/- (ii) Class-III employees- Rs. 20,000/- (iii) Class-II employees- Rs. 40,000/- (iv) Class-I employees- Rs. 80,000/- (v) In addition nearly 2/3rd of the amount contributed by the Government servant to the fund is also payable alongwith the above amounts. (vi) Encashment of the leave at the credit of the deceased Govt. servant subject to the maximum of 240 days. (vii) Entitlement of additional amount equal to the average balance in the GPF of the deceased Govt. servant during the three years immediately preceding the death of the subscriber subject to certain condition under the Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme." 6. Conspicuously the applicability of the afore policy is only to Class-III, and, Class-IV posts. (vii) Entitlement of additional amount equal to the average balance in the GPF of the deceased Govt. servant during the three years immediately preceding the death of the subscriber subject to certain condition under the Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme." 6. Conspicuously the applicability of the afore policy is only to Class-III, and, Class-IV posts. Moreover, the genre of compassionate appointment, is rested, on the pedestal, of, ensuring the overcoming(s) hence in contemporaneity, vis-a-vis, the demise, of a government servant, of, the sequeling thereto financial distress, besetting the bereaved family, and/or, is for ensuring, the, overcoming(s), of, the dire indigence, besetting the bereaved family, (i) and/or in other words, it is an ameliorative measure(s), and, is an exception to the constitutional mandate, appertaining, to, appointment, to, public posts, being made rather in tandem, with, the constitutional parameters, enshrined in Articles 14, and, 16 of the Constitution, of, India. 7. Apart therefrom, the, purveying(s) to the bereaved family, the benefit(s) of pecuniary assistance, by the State, is, obviously a well thought mitigatory step(s), to, ensure therefroms, alleviation, of, financial distress, or, of indigence(s), if any, as may become encumbered, upon, the bereaved family, upon, the demise of their bread earner happening during harness. Since in contemporaneity to the petitioner, making his claim, for compassionate appointment, the respondents had fixed an income criteria of Rs. 1,50,000/- and had included therewithin, monthly pension, family pension, Dearness Allowance, and Interim Relief, (i) and, with the respondents, in their reply, meted to the writ petition, rearing a contention qua one Bhawanti Devi, the grand mother of the writ petitioner, drawing per mensem pension of Rs. 14,444/-, (ii) thereupon(s), and, also with hers becoming declared, through Annexure R-13, as, the legal heir(s), of deceased Surender Kumar, thereupon (a) the legality of inclusion of the afore family pension, within the domain, of, the apposite income criteria, (b) and/or whether the petitioner becomes, yet, entitled to claim any right of his becoming awarded compassionate appointment, is, rather to be determined. The answer to the afore becomes purveyed by a decision, rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, in case titled, State of Himachal Pradesh & another vs. Shashi Kumar, where to which, became assigned Civil appeal No. 988 of 2019. The answer to the afore becomes purveyed by a decision, rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, in case titled, State of Himachal Pradesh & another vs. Shashi Kumar, where to which, became assigned Civil appeal No. 988 of 2019. In the judgment supra, the Hon'ble Apex Court, had after placing reliance, upon, a string of judicial verdicts, rather vindicated the fixation of an income limit, and, also had validated the inclusion therewithin(s), of, pension/family pension. (i) Moreover, it had concluded, that the solitary judgment, as, made by the Hon'ble Apex Court, in Govind Prakash Verma's case, rather wherein(s) the afore fixation, of, income limit, and, also, of, inclusion(s) therewithin, of, family pension, had become declared invalid, rather not declaring a correct stance of law. 8. Since the conundrum, besetting this Court hence has becoming completely answered, through the afore made verdict by the Hon'ble Apex Court, and, also with the grand mother of the writ petitioner receiving, on demise of her grand son, family pension, comprised in the afore sums, sums whereof fall(s) outside the limit(s), of, the income criteria, stipulated in the apposite policy, (i) thereupon, the writ petitioner, who is part of the family of his surviving grand mother, and, when the financial distress, besetting him, and, upon his siblings, strikingly in contemporaniety with the happening of demise of his father, rather has become therethrough(s) hence fully balmed, (ii) thereupon he has no valid surviving claim, for, any mandamus, being made upon the respondents, to grant him compassionate appointment. 9. Be that as it may, even otherwise, since the petitioner, is disclosed in the reply, meted on affidavit, to the writ petition, by the respondents, hence failed, since 2011, upto now to remove all the snags, occurring in his apposite application, thereupon he is deemed to acquiesce qua his purported financial indigence, as became encumbered upon him, in contemporaneity, vis-a-vis, the demise, of his predecessor-in-interest, hence occurring during harness, rather through family pension, being granted to his grand mother, hence becoming completely redressed. 10. In aftermath, since, the holistic purpose, of, appointment(s), on compassionate ground(s), and, as becomes enshrined in the policy, formulated by the respondents, is, to tide over the financial distress or indigence(s) besetting, the bereaved family, thereupon therethrough(s) the afore, does obviously become completely satiated. 11. 10. In aftermath, since, the holistic purpose, of, appointment(s), on compassionate ground(s), and, as becomes enshrined in the policy, formulated by the respondents, is, to tide over the financial distress or indigence(s) besetting, the bereaved family, thereupon therethrough(s) the afore, does obviously become completely satiated. 11. In view of the above observation(s), there is no merit in the extant petition, and, the same is accordingly dismissed. All pending applications also stand disposed of.