[2025:RJ-JP:49815-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 966/2025 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17841/2023 Lokesh Pachera S/o Shri Balveer, Aged About 29 Years, Resident Of Village Narayan Katata, Tehsil Deeg. District Bharatpur (Raj.) ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Additional Chief Secretary, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Director General Of Police, Police Headquarter, Behind Nehru Palace, Lal Kothi, Jaipur. 3. The Deputy Inspector General Of Police Recruitment And Promotion Board, Rajasthan, Jaipur, Police Headquarter, Behind Nehru Palace, Lal Kothi, Jaipur. 4. The Superintendent Of Police, Bharatpur District Bharatpur. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Iliyas Khan for Mr. Tanveer Ahamad For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 08/12/2025 This special appeal is directed against the order dated 03.04.2025 passed by learned Single Judge whereby, the writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking compassionate appointment has been dismissed. The relevant facts in brief are that father of the petitioner-a Government servant, expired on 03.08.1994 while in service. The [2025:RJ-JP:49815-DB] (2 of 3) [SAW-966/2025] petitioner applied for compassionate appointment on 23.02.2022. The delay was sought to be justified pleading discrepancy in his date of birth which took some time in its correction. The application seeking compassionate appointment came to be rejected by the respondents vide order dated 27.02.2023 on the premise of unjustified and unexplained delay in its filing. The writ petition preferred thereagainst has also been dismissed vide order dated 03.04.2025, the subject matter of challenge. Assailing the order, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Single Judge, while dismissing the writ petition, did not appreciate that delay in filing the application seeking compassionate appointment was justified as it took some time in getting the discrepancy in his date of birth in the matriculation certificate resolved. He, therefore, prays that the appeal be allowed, the order dated 03.04.2025 be quashed and set aside and the writ petition filed by him be allowed. Heard. Considered. The facts are not in dispute that father of the petitioner- a Government servant, died while in service on 03.08.1994 and the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment on 23.02.2022, i.e., with a delay of more than 27 years. Rule 10(3) of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996 stipulates a period of 90 days from the date of death within which a dependant of the deceased government employee has to apply for compassionate appointment. It is in tune of the object behind compassionate appointment, i.e., to meet the urgent need to provide immediate succor to the family of the deceased government employee. [2025:RJ-JP:49815-DB] (3 of 3) [SAW-966/2025] Taking into consideration the aforesaid object as underlined by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the cases of Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs. State of Haryana: 1994 (4) SCC 138 and Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. vs. Anusree K.B.: 2022 SCC OnLine 1331 and holding that it is a settled proposition of law that compassionate appointment is not a regular source of recruitment and its fundamental object is to tide over the abrupt financial crises arose in the family on account of sudden death of the sole bread earner and finding the explanation offered for delay to be farce, the writ petition has been dismissed. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any illegality or perversity in the order impugned warranting interference of this Court. Resultantly, this appeal is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J DIKSHA /17