BHAGTU RAWANI Vs. BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court with a grievance that his claim for appointment on compassionate grounds has been kept pending for years together and it has not been decided by the respondent authority.

(2.) Briefly stated, father of the petitioner namely, Dukhan Rawani was employed as Electricity Helper, who subsequently came under employment of the respondent-M/s Bharat Coking Coal Limited. He was married to one Sushni Devi, however, from the wedlock no child was born. Subsequently, Dukhan Rawani contracted a second marriage with Kalyani Devi and from this wedlock two sons were born. On a representation of the employee, name of his second wife and two sons were included in his service record. On death of Dukhan Rawani, his first wife namely, Sushni Devi was offered compassionate appointment. In the application form submitted by Sushni Devi name of the petitioner, his mother and his brother as family members of Sushni Devi was mentioned. The petitioner has claimed that by a registered adoption deed dated 09.07.1997 he was adopted by Sushni Devi as her son. The petitioner has pleaded that he and his brother were made nominee by Sushni Devi for payment of gratuity and Provident Fund amount. Sushni Devi died on 19.03.2012, where-after an application for compassionate appointment was filed by the petitioner on 23.07.201

(3.) In the aforesaid facts, contending that the respondent-M/s Bharat Coking Coal Limited, in terms of Clause 9.2 (ii) of N.C.W.A-VI, is under a duty to take a decision on the claim for compassionate appointment to the petitioner, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents are required to take a decision in the matter.