KAMALDEO KUMAR Vs. BCCL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner is son of late Dasrath Barhi, who went missing from 3.12.2002 while working on the post of Surface Trammer in Jogta Pit No. 3 under Colliery under BCCL. A Sanha of his missing was also lodged in East Basuria outpost bearing Station Diary No. 277 of 2002 on 20.12.2002. Factum of his missing was also published in the local newspaper on 22.12.2002. Petitioner also made a written complaint in Deori Police Station at Giridih district, permanent residence of petitioner and his father.

(2.) AFTER petitioner's father did not return for over a period of 7 years, petitioner's mother Bhagwatia Devi instituted a Title Suit No. 216 of 2009 before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. -II, Dhanbad seeking a declaration of civil death of her husband under Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Suit was contested by the respondent -BCCL and also by General Manager and Project Officer, Sijua Area. General Public of Nichitpur Township, Dhanbad were also noticed, but none appeared to contest the case. Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. -II, Dhanbad allowed the suit on contest in favour of the plaintiff and held that husband of the petitioner Dasrath Barhi has been missing since 3.12.2002 till now and is declared as civil death under Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent -BCCL submits that petitioner's father was absent from 2.12.2002 while working as Surface Trammer in the Mudidih Colliery. A departmental proceeding was initiated against him for such unauthorized absence in which despite several reminder, no one appeared. Disciplinary authority proceeded to dismiss the father of the petitioner through letter No. 30 dated 5.1.2004. Petitioner had made application only on 6.2.2014 stating that his father has died and he deserves compassionate appointment. It is submitted that since father of the petitioner had already been dismissed from service, no case for compassionate appointment can be made out on his part. He has submitted that learned Civil Court has nowhere observed on the legality of the dismissal of the father of the petitioner while making declaration of his civil death. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled for any compassionate appointment.