was alive, the present petitioner who is a son of the said Government Employee, is ineligible for such appointment. It was also contended that, the unfitness certificate of the wife of the deceased Government employee was not submitted in time. Therefore, the opposite parties have not committed any illegality in rejecting the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground. In such view of the matter, the learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that, the impugned rejection order passed the opposite parties is not illegal and hence, the writ petition is devoid of merit and the same should be dismissed. So far the case of Kartik bhoi is concerned, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that, in the case of the Kartik Bhoi the unfitness certificate of the mother was filed in time, therefore, his case was considered on his own merit and hence the same cannot be compared with the case of the present petitioner. 7. Having heard learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, and on a careful consideration of submissions, and upon further scrutiny of the materials available on record, this Court at the outset is of the observation that, the application of the petitioner has been rejected by the authorities specifically on two grounds. The first being that the petitioner was ineligible for consideration as the wife of the deceased Government employee, and the mother of the present petitioner, was alive at the time of consideration of petitioner’s application, therefore, in view of Rule 2(b) of the O.C.S. (RA) Rules, 1990, the case of the mother of the petitioner was to be considered first. However, an application was submitted by the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground. Secondly, a ground has also been taken that the unfitness medical certificate of the mother of the petitioner, i.e. the widow of the Government employee, was
