JUDGMENT : DEEPAK ROSHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsels for the parties. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for the following reliefs: For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) commanding upon the respondents to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground under the scheme of state of Jharkhand and also under the scheme of Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. For issuance of writ of mandamus directing and commanding upon the respondents to pay the monetary compensation to the petitioner as well as other consequential benefit to the petitioner from the death of the deceased/Home Guard i.e., on 03.04.12, till the date when the dependent, petitioner has attained his majority and applied for his compassionate appointment 3. The brief facts of the case are that the father of the petitioner, Late Ramanand Karmali was appointed on 10.12.1986 in the Jharkhand State Home Guard. While posted at ONGC Point, Dumri, he was on duty on 03.04.2012 and was killed by unknown miscreants using sharp weapons. An FIR was registered at Gomiya Police Station under Sections 302 /34 of the IPC, based on the statement of fellow Home Guard Rama Turi, who discovered the body the next day. The petitioner asserts that his father held the post of Constable in the Jharkhand Home Guard Service, whereas the respondents claim that he was merely a Home Guard. Following his father's death, several representations were made to the Director General and the District Commandant seeking compassionate appointment, as the deceased was the sole earning member of the family and at the time of the death of the father, the petitioner was a minor, and after attaining majority, he submitted a fresh application for compassionate appointment, which was not considered. 4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Jharkhand Home Guard Service qualifies as “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution and is thus bound by constitutional obligations. He further submits that the petitioner’s father was killed while on active duty at ONGC Point, Dumri. An FIR was registered (Gomiya PS Case No. 60/12 dated 05.04.2012) under Sections 302 /34 IPC, proving the unnatural and service-related death and applications were submitted on 12.05.2012 to the District Commandant and on 15.02.2022 to the Director General-cum-Directorate Commandant, stating that the deceased was the sole earning member and seeking compassionate appointment for the petitioner. An FIR was registered (Gomiya PS Case No. 60/12 dated 05.04.2012) under Sections 302 /34 IPC, proving the unnatural and service-related death and applications were submitted on 12.05.2012 to the District Commandant and on 15.02.2022 to the Director General-cum-Directorate Commandant, stating that the deceased was the sole earning member and seeking compassionate appointment for the petitioner. He further submits that as per the scheme of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Home Guards are also entitled to compassionate appointment and other service benefits in the event of death in the line of duty and the petitioner’s mother has given her no-objection for the petitioner to be granted compassionate appointment, fulfilling the requirement of family consent. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the prayer of the petitioner and submits that no relief can be granted to this petitioner. 6. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after going through the documents annexed with the respective affidavits and the averments made therein, it appears that as per letter dated 14.02.2008 issued by the Director General, Home Gaurds, Jharkhand, the financial liability for compensation in case of death during duty/training is to be borne by the department or institution where the Home Guard was deputed, i.e. ONGC in this case. Further, the Jharkhand Home Guard (Volunteers) Rules, 2014 introduced the provision for compassionate appointment for the first time and prior to that, no such provision existed for enrolment of Home Guards on compassionate grounds. Admittedly, the father of the petitioner died in 2012, and the compassionate appointment rule came into force in 2014. It further transpires that the petitioner’s request was duly considered and forwarded by the Home Guard Headquarters; however, it was rejected by the Department of Home, Prison and Disaster Management via memo dated 09.09.2021, indicating no arbitrary denial. It is also evident from the averments made in the counter affidavit, which has not been denied by the petitioner that a compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- was provided by ONGC to the District Commandant which was subsequently paid to the petitioner’s mother, Murti Devi, fulfilling the relief obligation. 7. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, no relief can be granted to this petitioner. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed. 8. Pending I.A., if any, also stands closed.