YUGESH KUMAR Vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LIMITED AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed for quashing the order dated 24.08.2010 (Annexure -6), whereby the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment has been rejected without assigning any reason. Petitioner further prays for payment of death -cum -retiral benefit admissible to his father i.e. Gratuity with interest, Life Cover Scheme, Benevolent Fund with interest, Provident Fund and arrears of family pension with interest.

(2.) IT appears that petitioner's father namely late Shiv Dayal Gorh was working as a peace rated worker in Bokaro Colliery. It is further stated that while he was working so, he died on 09.12.2004. Il is stated that after the death of petitioner's father, petitioner's mother namely Kumari Bai filed an application for compassionate appointment on 28.04.2005. After receiving the application, the respondent - CCL gave an offer to the petitioner's mother that instead of appointing her on any post, the Company wants to give her monetary compensation. However, mother of the petitioner refused to take monetary compensation and informed the respondent in this regard vide letters dated 10.05.2007 and 17.07.2007. It is stated that while the aforesaid matter was pending, unfortunately mother of the petitioner died on 01.11.2007. It is stated that the petitioner vide letter dated 05.11.2007 informed the respondent about the death of his mother. It is stated that on 03.07.2010, petitioner applied for compassionate appointment, as by that time, he attained the age of 18 years. The aforesaid application of the petitioner rejected by the impugned order dated 24.08.2010 (Annexure -6).

(3.) A counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent - CCL, wherein the respondent stated that the application filed by the petitioner for appointment is time barred, as the same has been filed after six years of the death of petitioner's father. It is further stated that the respondent has found that the application of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground is not maintainable, because on the date of filing of the application, petitioner was minor. It is further submitted that the name of the petitioner is not mentioned in the service book as son of deceased namely Late Shiv Dayal Gorh. Accordingly, the application of the petitioner for appointment has been dismissed.