MILU RAM Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the letter dated No. PD/MP/9.3.0/NK/18/3805 dtd. 20/12/2018 (Annexure-4), whereby and whereunder the claim for compassionate appointment of the petitioner has been rejected by the respondent-authorities. Further prayer has been made for a direction upon the respondent- authorities to issue letter of appointment on compassionate ground in favour of the petitioner.

(3.) As per the factual matrix, the father of the petitioner, late Pukram was employed with the respondent-CCL to the post of Ex-EP Fitter, KDH Project, NK Area and subsequently, died in harness on 23/6/2017. It is the case of the petitioner that on 28/5/1998, petitioner was 15 years of age, which is also evident from LTC Form. It is the specific case of the petitioner that documents submitted by father of the petitioner clearly shows that on the date of submission of application for compassionate appointment, age of the petitioner was 34 years 2 months, which is well within the limits for consideration for appointment on compassionate ground. Inspite of the same, the case of the petitioner was not considered by the respondent-authorities on the ground that different age has been mentioned in several documents. As such, the petitioner was referred to the Medical Board, which was of the opinion that age of the petitioner was between 35 to 40 years and hence, his case for compassionate appointment was rejected. In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has thrown challenge to the said order of rejection.