STATE OF JHARKHAND Vs. KIRAN KUNWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent directed against the order/judgment dtd. 1/10/2018 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Civil Review No. 90 of 2017 by which the review petition filed against the order dtd. 3/12/2013 passed in W.P.(S) No. 178 of 2013, was dismissed and the Deputy Commissioner, respondent No.2 was directed to consider the claim for compassionate appointment of the writ petitioner's son.

(2.) It requires to refer the background of the case which reads as hereunder:

(3.) Learned Advocate General assisted by Mr. Piyush Chitresh, learned counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand has submitted that the impugned order passed in Civil Review No.90 of 2017 is not sustainable in the eye of law because the Review Court ought to have considered the fact that the dependant of the deceased employee, if was appointed under the work charged establishment, will not be entitled for compassionate appointment in view of the judgment rendered by the Full Bench of this Court in Ram Prasad Singh and Another vs. The State of Jharkhand and Others (supra) but the same has not been considered and as such, according to them, when the Full Bench of this Court has laid down a ratio not to provide appointment to the dependant of the deceased employee who have been appointed under the work charged establishment, no appointment can be provided to such dependant. Non-consideration of this aspect of the matter renders the impugned order with fault of illegality and hence the impugned order passed in Civil Review No. 90 of 2017 is not sustainable in the eye of law.