KOULESHWAR MAHTO Vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the order dated 10.7.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 5180/2007*, by which the writ petition filed by the petitioner -appellant herein claiming compassionate appointment in place of his deceased father was dismissed.

(2.) THE petitioner -appellant herein, Kouleshwar Mahto, had filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge claiming appointment in place of his deceased father, Jogi Mahto, who died in the year 1998. Admittedly the deceased Jogi Mahto in his service record had indicated the names of his two sons, who were Hira Lal and Bhuneshwar Mahto and a daughter After the death of the deceased employee. Jogi Mahto, the younger son, Bhuneshwar Mahto, filed an application claiming compassionate appointment from the respondent, Central Coalfields Ltd., in place of his deceased father and the documents in support of the - same were submitted by the appellant, which included his Matriculation Certificate also. In course of checking of the documents, the respondent, Central Coalfields Ltd., noticed that there was discrepancy in the name of the appellant claiming appointment as his name in the Matriculation Certificate was indicated as Kouleshwar Mahto, whereas his name in the service record of his father was Bhuneshwar Mahto. Another discrepancy that was noticed by the respondent was that the date of birth of the appellant in the service record of his deceased father was 1971 but the date of birth as per the Matriculation Certificate was 1977.Thus, there was a discrepancy not only with regard to the name of the appellant, but also the age of the appellant, which created a doubt as to whether he genuinely was the son of deceased Jogi Mahto or not. The respondent, Central Coalfields Ltd., therefore, rejected the application of the appellant and refused to grant -him appointment on compassionate ground. This prompted the petitioner -appellant to file a writ petition before the learned Single Judge, assailing the order of the respondent, Central Coalfields Ltd., refusing to grant him appointment. The learned Single Judge, on a consideration of facts and materials on record, was pleased to reject the writ petition, against which the appeal has been preferred.

(3.) IT appears that a police report in the past had also been sought with regard to the identity as to whether Kouleshwar Mahto and Bhuneshwar Mahto are one and the same person and the police report indicated that Bhuneshwar Mahto and Kouleshwar Mahto are in fact one and the same person. The police report indicated that although Bhuneshwar Mahto is recorded as the son of the deceased, Jogi Mahto, whose name was found mentioned in the service record also as son of the deceased, Kouleshwar Mahto, in fact, is the son of the deceased Jogi Mahto. The end result of this enquiry obviously indicates that Kouleshwar Mahto although is the son of deceased, Jogi Mahto, his name having not been found n the service record, is affecting the claim of the appellant Kouleshwar Mahto for appointment on compassionate ground.