WESTERN COALFILDS LTD Vs. KAUSHALYA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.[2] BY the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has rejected the contention of the employee-appellant, on the basis of which compassionate employment was refused to the son of writ-petitioner (who is the respondent in this appeal).

(2.) Admittedly, there was no response by the appellant (employer) to this letter. The appellant did not grant any compassionate employment to the writ petitioner nor did they intimate to her any reason why she could not be granted compassionate appointment. The appellant employer merely gave her monetary compensation of Rs. 2,000/- per month which was later on increased to Rs. 3,000/-per month.

(3.) The appellant relies upon the said letter of the writ petitioner for the defence that since the son at the time of his father's death was aged less than 15 years, therefore, his name could not have been kept on the live roster under clause 5.0 (iii) of Chapter IX, titled' Social Security' which is a part of NCWA-V.