BASUDEV SINGH Vs. EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -THIS appeal has been filed challenging the Judgment and order passed by the learned single Judge dated 23rd August, 2004 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner claiming appointment on compensatory grounds has been dismissed. The admitted facts are that the father of the petitioner retired from service of the Eastern Coalfields Ltd. on 25th March, 1983. During his lifetime he married twice and he contracted the second marriage during the lifetime of the first wife. The petitioner/appellant is the son of the second wife. After retirement, the father of the petitioner died. During his lifetime the appellant had nominated his second wife as the legal heir. For the aforesaid purpose the mother of the appellant was medically examined and found to be fit for employment in the year 1983. She was, therefore, selected for appointment. However, no letter of appointment was actually issued. The father of the appellant filed a writ petition in the year 1998 being W. P. No. 2142 (W) of 1998 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds for the mother of the appellant. At this stage, It is, however, emphatically stated by the learned counsal for the appellant that the writ petition had actually been filed claiming appointment on compensatory ground in terms of the contract entered into between the employer and the employees.

(2.) BE that as it may, it is irrelevant for deciding the controversy raised in the writ petition. We may now notice the other relevant facts. In the meantime, the first wife of the deceased employee had also passed away on 19th October, 1998. On 1st March, 1999 the writ petition being W. P. No. 2142 (W) of 1998 was also dismissed on the ground that the status of the mother of the appellant being the legal heir of the deceased employee was disputed, hence the second wife, i. e, the mother of the appellant cannot be appointed on compensatory grounds. We may notice here the observations made by the learned single Judge whilst dismissing the aforesaid writ petition which have been reproduced in the writ petition: "having considered the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties, I am inclined to accept Mrs. Mitra's submission that the status of Smt. Anita Singh being in dispute the question of her appointment on compassionate ground in place of the petitioner cannot arise".

(3.) WHILST dismissing the writ petition, a further direction had also been issued to the respondents to consider for payment of retiral benefits of the deceased employee to the legal heir and on the amount being received, the Regal heir was directed to vacate the quarter simultaneously. Thereafter, the appellant filed a writ petition being W. P. No. 5251 (W) of 2003 challenging the denial of employment to him being the dependent son of the deceased employee. This writ petition was also disposed of by order dated 30th September, 2003 with a direction, to the respondent-authorities to consider the claim of the appellant for employment on compensatory ground in place of his late father. Pursuant to the directions given by this Court, the appellant was duly called for a personal hearing which was fixed on 17th March, 2004. The appellant appeared before the Personal Manager, Pandabeswar Colliery with related papers, documents in support of his claim. However, by letter dated 19/20th march, 2004 the claim of the appellant has again been rejected. The appellant, therefore, filed the present writ petition impugning the aforesaid decision of the employer. By Judgment and order dated 23rd august, 2004 the writ petition has been dismissed. Hence, the present letters patent appeal.