ORDER : Pramath Patnaik, J. The aforesaid writ application has been filed for quashing the letter dated 08.07.2015 vide Annexure-19 to the writ application and for a direction to the respondents to provide the benefits of provisions of 9.3.0 of the National Coal Wage Agreement, hereinafter to be referred in short as 'N.C.W.A.' for providing appointment on compassionate ground. 2. The brief facts, as disclosed in the writ application is that the father of the petitioner, namely, Laxmi Ravidas (now deceased) was appointed by the respondents as CAT-I Mazdoor in Topa Colliery. After the death of the father of the petitioner, an application for compassionate appointment of the eldest brother of the petitioner i.e. Santosh Ravidas was submitted, but unfortunately, the eldest brother of the petitioner also died prior to his appointment. Admittedly, the petitioner is the youngest son of the deceased-employee. After the death of the father of the petitioner, the mother of the petitioner, Samudri Devi, who was the nominee and dependent of her husband, made representation before the Personnel Manager vide letter dated 28.06.2002, praying, therein, for examination of her age by the Medical Board, as her age was recorded in the service records of her husband more than her actual age. Thereafter, representation was submitted before the respondents seeking appointment of the eldest brother of the petitioner, namely, Santosh Ravidas under the provisions of 9.3.2 of the N.C.W.A. by the petitioner's mother. The case of the appointment of the petitioner's brother under the provisions of 9.3.2. of the N.C.W.A. was forwarded and it was considered by the duly constituted Screening Committee. Vide letter dated 04.05.2004 (Annexure-9), the brother of the petitioner was asked by the respondent no. 2 to contact the Personnel Department of the Kuju Area regarding the date of interview with reference to the application for employment under 9.3.2 of the N.C.W.A., but the said Santosh Ravidas died on 24.12.2002 as evident from Annexure-10 to the writ application. Thereafter, the mother of the petitioner made an application before the Management for employment of her daughter, namely, Shanti Devi under 9.3.2 of the N.C.W.A. on compassionate ground in place of her late husband, namely, Laxmi Ravidas. In the year 2012 vide Annexure-14, mother of the petitioner, submitted an application for employment of the petitioner on compassionate ground in place of her deceased-husband. In the year 2012 vide Annexure-14, mother of the petitioner, submitted an application for employment of the petitioner on compassionate ground in place of her deceased-husband. The case of the petitioner for employment was forwarded by the Manager (Personnel) to the Project Officer, Topa Colliery (Respondent No. 4) for consideration and onward transmission to the office of the Staff Officer CP & A. Kuju Area for further action. Again, the mother of the petitioner made a representation before the respondents requesting, therein, for compassionate appointment of her son. Vide Annexure-16 to the writ application, the mother of the petitioner was requested by the respondents Company to furnish information as well as relevant documents on the issues stated therein, in order to examine the case of the petitioner for appropriate action vide Annexure-17. In response to the aforesaid letter, the mother of the petitioner submitted all required documents to the senior Manager (Personnel), Topa Colliery (Respondent no. 3) for needful action. Vide order dated 08.07.2015 (Annexure-19), the respondent No. 3 has regretted the petitioner's prayer for consideration of his compassionate appointment. Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 08.07.2015, vide Annexure-19 to the writ petition, the petitioner, left with no other alternative and efficacious remedy, has knocked the door of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievances. 3. Heard Mr. Gautam Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Bhaiya Vishwajeet Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents-CCL. 4. Mr. Gautam Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner during course of hearing has strenuously urged that the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment is in the teeth of the relevant provisions of the N.C.W.A. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the rejection of the case of the petitioner vide Annexure-19 amounts to breach of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 5. Controverting the averments made in the writ application, a counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents, wherein, it has been submitted that the case of the petitioner for consideration of employment was examined in the light of the provisions of the N.C.W.A. and the Circular of the CCL HQ. 5. Controverting the averments made in the writ application, a counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents, wherein, it has been submitted that the case of the petitioner for consideration of employment was examined in the light of the provisions of the N.C.W.A. and the Circular of the CCL HQ. and found that his case was not fit to be considered since the petitioner was 12 years of age at the time of death of the employee and his name was also not kept on the Live Roaster of the Company. In the counter affidavit, it has further been submitted that the mother of the petitioner, namely, Smt. Samudri Devi, wife of late Laxmi Rabidas has applied for employment of her daughter, namely, Shanti Kumari vide letter of representation dated 27.01.2006 in place of her deceased husband late Laxmi Rabidas, mentioning therein, that she is not willing to take monetary compensation as per the provision of the N.C.W.A. 6. Mr. Bhaiya Vishwajeet Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents-CCL has vociferously submitted that due to prevaricating stand on the part of the mother of the petitioner, the case of the petitioner could not be considered. However, learned counsel for the respondents in his usual fairness submitted that if she applied for grant of monetary compensation, the same shall be duly considered by the respondents. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the records, it appears that the petitioner has not been able to make out a case for interference due to the following facts and reasons. (i) Admittedly, after the death of the deceased-employee, late Laxmi Ravidas on submission of application for compassionate appointment of her eldest son by Samudri Devi (nominee of the petitioner's father), the Management-Company considered the case of the eldest brother of the petitioner, namely, Santosh Ravidas in the year 2004, but, by that time, the said Santosh Ravidas has died, so it cannot be construed that the respondents did not consider the case of the legal heir of the deceased employee, late Laxmi Ravidas for consideration of compassionate appointment. It appears that the mother of the petitioner had applied for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground in the year 2011. It appears that the mother of the petitioner had applied for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground in the year 2011. Due to indecisiveness on the part of the mother of the petitioner, it was not possible on the part of the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment. (ii) It is a settled position that the compassionate appointment is not a matter of right, rather, it is a matter of concession. On perusal of the impugned Annexure-19 to the writ application, the same does not suffer from any infirmity or irregularity so as to warrant interference of this Court. (iii) So far as the claim of the petitioner for grant of monetary compensation as admissible under the relevant provisions of the N.C.W.A. is concerned, the mother of the petitioner is entitled, provided that she files an application for grant of the same. 8. In view of the reasons stated in the foregoing paragraphs and as a logical sequitor, the prayer of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment is not entertained, but, so far as the grant of benefit of monetary compensation is concerned, it is left open to the mother of the petitioner to file an application for grant of monetary compensation. In the event, the application is filed by the mother of the petitioner for grant of monetary compensation, the same be considered and appropriate order be passed in accordance with law and relevant provision of N.C.W.A. within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 9. With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.