SANTI RUIDAS Vs. COAL INDIA LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In stead of hearing the stay application, we have taken up the appeal itself for final hearing with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties by treating the same as on day's list.

(2.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 25th June, 2009 of the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition of the Appellant for compassionate appointment on the ground that the Appellant being a female aged 17 years 11 months, 17 days on the date of death of her father was not entitled to keep her name on a live roster according to bipartite settlement.

(3.) The Appellant's father Panchu Ruidas, belonging to a backward class was an employee of the Respondent company - Eastern Coal Fields Limited. Panchu died on 27th December, 1999. The Appellant being the youngest of the three daughters of the deceased, who had left no male issue, made an application for compassionate appointment. The Appellant, who has passed the secondary school certificate examination, was called for the Screening Test by letter dated 31st July, 2000 (Annexure P-2) and 6/7th December, 2000 (Annexure P3) and thereafter the Appellant was called for the Medical Test on 4th January, 2001 by letter dated 23rd December, 2000 (Annexure P-4). Thereafter, the Appellant was called by letter dated 29/30th April 2002 to meet the Personal Manager (Emp.) with all educational certificates in original. Since the Appellant was not being offered any employment on compassionate ground, the Appellant and her mother and workers union went on making representations. Ultimately, the Petitioner moved this Court by filing W.P. No. 1262 of 2008 which the Respondents resisted on the ground of delay. After overruling that objection, a learned single Judge of this Court (S.P. Talukdar, J.) disposed of the writ petition on 5.8.2008 with a direction to the Appellant herein to make a fresh representation and a direction to the Respondents to consider the matter "in its proper perspective." The Appellant, accordingly, made a representation, but by the impugned communication dated 26th September, 2008 (Annexure - P-9) the Appellant was informed that the Appellant was 17 years 11 months & 17 days old as on the date of death of the Appellant's father which took plane on 27th December, 1999 and that the provision to keep the name of the dependant younger than 18 years on the live roster was applicable only to male dependants, but not to female dependants. The Appellant was, accordingly, informed that her case for employment did not warrant any consideration.