JUDGMENT : Compelled by rejection of her representation for compassionate appointment, the petitioner has approached this Court. 2. Briefly stated, the petitioner is widow of the deceased employee namely, Late Ratan Manjhi, who was appointed on 05.05.1974 as Trammer in Hindegir Project under BarkaSayal area of M/s Central Coalfields Limited. Husband of the petitioner died in harness on 27.11.2001 at Central Hospital, Naisarai. Consequently, name of the employee was removed from the roll of the company w.e.f. 25.12.2001. The petitioner submitted an application for compassionate appointment under Clause 9.3.2 of NCWA-VII, which was received by the respondents on 15.05.2002. 3. On the direction of the Personnel Manager, Hindegir Colliery, the petitioner appeared before the Medical Board on 04.06.2007, when her age was assessed at 42 ½years as on 07.12.2006. However, the respondents offered monetary compensation instead of, appointment to the petitioner. The petitioner refused to accept the said offer for monetary compensation and submitted her representation dated 06.08.2009 to the Director (Personnel), Central Coalfields Limited for providing employment under Clause 9.3.2 of NCWA-VII. Aforesaid representation was followed by the reminder dated 28.10.2010. Her claim has been finally rejected by an order dated 23.02.2011. 4. Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that once it is found that the female dependant of a deceased employee has not crossed the age of 45 years she is entitled for appointment, and since the petitioner's age was assessed at 42 ½years as on 07.12.2006, she could not have been offered monetary compensation in lieu of appointment. 5. In the counter-affidavit, the facts pleaded by the petitioner have not been denied. The respondents have admitted that the Medical Board assessed the age of the petitioner at 42½ years as on 07.12.2006 and accordingly, her date of birth was fixed as 07.06.1964. Surprisingly, for justifying their action in not offering employment to the petitioner the respondents have pleaded that in view of the nature of work which is hazardous, the respondent-company encourages employment of male personnel. 6. The stand taken by the respondents is apprarently contrary to the constitutional mandate under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The National Coal Wage Agreement is an outcome of a settlement between the workers' union, the coal company and the Central Government and it has attained statutory force ("Mohan Mahto Vs. 6. The stand taken by the respondents is apprarently contrary to the constitutional mandate under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The National Coal Wage Agreement is an outcome of a settlement between the workers' union, the coal company and the Central Government and it has attained statutory force ("Mohan Mahto Vs. M/s Central Coal Field Ltd. & Ors." reported in (2007) 8 SCC 549 ). Once it is found that the respondent-M/s CCL is bound to extend the benefit under NCWA which contains a specific provision for appointment of female dependants, rejection of the claim of the petitioner for appointment on the aforesaid ground must be held illegal. Accordingly, impugned order dated 23.02.2011 is quashed and consequently, letter dated 14.06.2007 is also quashed. The General Manager, Central Coalfields Limited-respondent no.4 is directed to issue letter of appointment to the petitioner, on completion of necessary formalities, within six weeks. 7. The writ petition stands allowed, in the aforesaid terms.