BINOD BHUINYA Vs. BHARAT COKING COAL LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the order dated 17th October, 2013 passed in Civil Review No. 4 of 2012, in and by which learned Single Judge declined to review the order dated 14.7.2011 passed in W.P. (S) No. 6257 of 2006, whereby the claim of the appellant for compassionate appointment was rejected. The appellant is the son of late Prasadi Bhuinya, who died in harness on 15.3.1994, while working as Wagon Loader in Kusunda Colliery under the respondents. After the death of the father of the appellant, the mother of the appellant submitted representation dated 21.9.1995 to the Management requesting them to keep under consideration the case of the appellant (the then minor) in the live roster till he attains the age of majority. When the appellant attained majority, the appellant wrote to the Project Officer, Kusunda Colliery stating that he had attained majority and that he is entitled to be provided with compassionate appointment. The Project Officer issued letter dated 6.6.2003 stating that after the death of the appellant's father, no application for providing compassionate appointment was submitted to the concerned respondents and therefore, the case of the appellant for compassionate appointment cannot be taken into consideration. Thereafter the mother of the appellant and the appellant filed WP(S) No. 6257 of 2006 seeking direction (i) for payment of death -cum -retiral benefits of late Prasadi Bhuinya and (ii) for providing compassionate appointment to the appellant. The Court vide order dated 20.11.2006 passed an order that the claim of the appellant for compassionate appointment is not tenable. Thereafter, the appellant filed I.A. No. 1391 of 2009 in W.P. (S) No. 6257 of 2006 for amendment of the pleadings as well as prayer portion of the writ petition for incorporating the prayer that the name of the appellant be directed to be kept on live roster till he attains majority. I.A. No. 1391 of 2009 was dismissed holding that by order dated 20.11.2006 the claim of the appellant for his appointment on compassionate ground was already found to be not tenable and hence that issue cannot be reopened by filing interlocutory application. Insofar as payment of death -cum -retiral benefits, the Court held that provident fund and pension having already been settled, nothing remains to be paid to the appellant and his mother and hence the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition vide order dated 14.7.2011.

(2.) SEEKING review of the order dated 14.7.2011 passed in W.P. (S) No. 6257 of 2006, the appellant filed Civil Review No. 4 of 2012. By order dated 17.10.2013, the said Review Application was dismissed holding that vide order, dated 20.11.2006, this Court had already passed an order to the effect that the claim of the petitioner No. 2 (the appellant herein) for his appointment on compassionate ground is not tenable and that decision may not be a subject matter for reviewing the order.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. has submitted that at the time of death of the employee -Prasadi Bhuinya (on 15.3.1994), the appellant was aged only seven years and as per the Scheme the name of the male dependent would be kept on live roster only if the surviving male dependent is above 12 years or 14 years, depending on the nature of his skill and qualification. The learned counsel further submitted that since the appellant was aged only seven years, he could not be considered for compassionate appointment and there cannot be any direction for considering the case of the appellant for compassionate appointment dehors the Scheme of the Bharat Coking Coal Limited.