ASHOK KUMAR MEHTA Vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner's father, namely, Etwa Mahto @ Baldeo Mahto was a permanent employee of M/s. Central Coalfields Limited. He was working as Mason (Category IV) at Aarra colliery of Central Coalfields Limited. In course of employment, he sustained injuries, as a result of which, his left hand was amputed and as such, he became unfit to perform his work of a Mason. Accordingly, he was referred to the Central Medical Board for medical examination. Thereupon, petitioner's father on being examined on 2.7.1997 at Gandhi Nagar Hospital, Ranchi was declared unfit. Accordingly, his services were terminated on 13.8.1997 in terms of Clause 9.4.0 of the National Coal Wage Agreement. Thereafter the petitioner being son aged at that time as 35 years, applied in September, 1997 for giving employment in terms of Clause 9.4.0 of the National Coal Wage Agreement as he was dependant on his father Etwa Mahto. The petitioner also submitted his educational certificate in which his father's name has been recorded as Baldeo Mahto and not Etwa Mahto. In order to remove confusion, if any, the petitioner also submitted an affidavit dated 29.12.1997 sworn by his father Etwa Mahto stating therein that he is also known as Baldeo Mahto. Thereupon the matter was enquired into at the instance of the Project Officer, Aarra Colliery (respondent No. 5). The authority having been satisfied with the documents produced that the petitioner is the son of Etwa Mahto, who is also known as Baldeo Mahto made recommendation, vide letter No. 124223 dated 30.3.1998 (Annexure 11) for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground. In spite of that, petitioner's claim was turned down by the respondent No. 6, vide its letter dated 13.2.1999 (Annexure 4). That order was challenged before this Court, vide C.W.J.C. No. 1270 of 2000(R). The said writ application was disposed of directing the petitioner to produce the affidavit dated 29.12.1997 sworn by his father before the competent authority so that the matter be enquired into by verifying L.T.I. appearing on the affidavit with any other L.T.I. appearing in any service record as to whether the affidavit filed by the petitioner has been sworn by the father of the petitioner or not. Pursuant to that, the petitioner filed a representation before the competent authority on 12.6.2001 but when no order was passed, a contempt petition was filed. During the pendency of that writ application, an order was passed as contained in letter dated 11.6.2002 (Annexure 7) whereby the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground was again rejected. The said letter as contained in Annexure 7 has been sought to be quashed in this writ application.

(2.) Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondent without making any enquiry as to whether this petitioner is the son of Etwa Mahto or not rejected the claim by taking plea that the L.T.I. bearing on the document relating to service record of the Etwa Mahto could not have been verified by the R.T.I. appearing upon affidavit dated 29.12.1997. Thus without there being any enquiry on the point the claim of the petitioner was rejected which is quite illegal as many documents are there with the employer having R.T.I. of the petitioner's father as father of the petitioner continued to work till 13.8.1997 in spite of his left hand being amputed in the year 1996 but the authority did not take care to get the R.T.I. appearing on those documents verified from the R.T.I. appearing on the affidavit.

(3.) It was further submitted that apart from that, the respondent did not take into consideration the enquiry report submitted earlier,-vide letter No. 12423 dated 30.3.1998 wherein, the authority of Central Coal Field Limited after holding enquiry, found that the petitioner is the son of Etwa Mahto. Thus, in these view of the mater, the order passed by the respondent-Project Officer rejecting the claim of the petitioner for his appointment on compassionate ground is fit to be set aside and accordingly, the authority be directed to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground.