Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1744 (JHR)

Jhirgi Devi v. Central Coalfields Ltd

2018-08-06

SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

body2018
JUDGMENT Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - Prayer in the writ petition is for a direction upon the respondent-M/s CCL to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner. 2. The petitioner claims that she is legally-wedded wife of the employee-late Jhirga Oraon. After death of the employee-late Jhirga Oraon on 31.12.2012 an application was submitted by the petitioner on 25.05.2013 for employment on compassionate ground. The respondents have admitted that the petitioner''s name is recorded in Gratuity Nomination Form-F, service-sheet excerpts, LTC Form-A, PS(3) & PS(4) Forms of the deceased-employee, however, on an objection of one Smt. Gayatri Kujur also claiming herself wife of the deceased-employee a committee was constituted for verification of genuineness of claim of the petitioner. This committee has submitted a report on 22.06.2014 with a recommendation for compassionate appointment to the petitioner. Claim of the said Smt. Gayatri Kujur was rejected primarily on the ground that her name was not recorded in any of the service record of the deceased-employee. The respondent-M/s CCL has paid death-cum-retiral benefits to the petitioner and now the petitioner in her affidavit dated 23.07.2018 has asserted that Gayatri Kujur has died on 01.09.2016. She has produced a Death Certificate dated 29.10.2016. 3. In the aforesaid facts, claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment stands admitted by the respondents, however, Mr. M.B. Lal, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that now the petitioner has crossed the age of 45 years which is the maximum age for appointment under the respondent-M/s CCL. 4. The petitioner has asserted that at the time of death of her husband she was aged about 42 years. The deceased employee was appointed on 02.03.1989 and in the service excerpts of the employee age of the petitioner is recorded as 20 years. In the counter-affidavit/ supplementary counter-affidavit the respondents have not disputed that at the time of death of her husband on 31.12.2012 the petitioner was aged about 42 years. At the time when enquiry report dated 22.06.2014 was submitted she was below the age of 45 years and when this writ petition was filed on 08.04.2015 on that date also the petitioner was below the age of 45 years. Delay which has occurred in the meantime is on account of laches on the part of the respondent-M/s CCL. At the time when enquiry report dated 22.06.2014 was submitted she was below the age of 45 years and when this writ petition was filed on 08.04.2015 on that date also the petitioner was below the age of 45 years. Delay which has occurred in the meantime is on account of laches on the part of the respondent-M/s CCL. Except stating that there was a dispute raised by Smt. Gayatri Kujur claiming herself wife of the deceased-employee due to which no decision was taken, the respondents have failed to offer a plausible explanation for delay in appointment of the petitioner. In view of the report submitted by the committee on 22.06.2014, the aforesaid explanation on delay due to a dispute raised by Smt. Gayatri Kujur is liable to be rejected. It is not only necessary that in all matters of compassionate appointment claim should be raised within the stipulated period, at the same time claim for compassionate appointment must be decided at the earliest. Delay on the part of the respondents cannot be a ground to deny the petitioner compassionate appointment. 5. Accordingly, in the above facts and for the reasons indicated hereinabove, this writ petition is allowed with a direction to the General Manager (P&IR), CCL, At & PO-Darbhanga House, PS-Kotawali, District-Ranchi- respondent no.3 to assess educational and physical eligibility of the petitioner and, if she is found fit, appointment shall be granted to her within a period of six weeks.