Ramjee Upadhyay vs Central Coalfields Limited

Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.—Heard the parties.

Brief facts of the case is that the father of the petitioner Kesho Upadhyay (deceased), who was working as Foreman, Rajrappa Washery Project, Central Coalfields Limited, Ramgarh, had died in harness. During treatment father of the petitioner died on 07.04.2008 at Rajrappa Project Silver Jubilee Hospital, Rajrappa. The father of the petitioner died leaving behind his wife Krishna Kishorei Devi, three sons namely Ramjee Upadhyay, Parmeshwar Nath Upadhyay and Sheojee Upadhyay and one married daughter named Smt. Pushpa Devi. It is said that initially there was some disputes in the family but, later on, the mother gave an application to concerned authority of the Company within time i.e on 19.10.2008, for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground. Thereafter petitioner''s mother had given several reminders/representations to the concerned authorities of Central Coalfields Limited for appointment of the petitioner but, the matter was not considered by the said authority.

Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Ansari submits that when the matter was not considered by the concerned authority CCL, the petitioner along with her mother preferred a writ petition bearing W.P.(S) No. 2201 of 2010 before this Court, which was disposed of vide order dated 29.07.2010 with a direction to the respondent CCL to consider the case of the petitioner for his appointment on compassionate ground and take a decision in the matter by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law. In compliance of order dated 29.07.2010, the Project Officer, Rajrappa Washery, Ramgarh by passing a reasoned order has rejected the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground.

Vide order dated 17.10.2016, learned counsel for the State was directed to inquire from the Bihar School Examination Board regarding authenticity of the certificate and the date of birth within a period of four weeks. Today, when the case was taken up the Junior Counsel for the State Miss. Jyoti Nayan submits that till date she has not received any inquiry report.

Mr. Das, learned counsel for the CCL very clearly submits that even if, the stand of the petitioner is taken into consideration and accepted, he is not entitled for consideration on compassionate ground, as he has crossed the age of 35 years. It would be relevant to mention here that as per NCWA Rules, the maximum age provided for appointment is 35 years and as such, the petitioner has crossed maximum age, so his case has not been considered hence, the impugned order has rightly been passed.

Going through the rival submissions of the parties, this court is of the considered view that as per the averments made in the counter-affidavit and the settled Principles of law the petitioner is not entitled for compassionate appointment.

As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid facts, circulars, guidelines, Rules the writ petition warrants no interference and as such the writ petition merits dismissal.

Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed.