JUDGMENT : Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.: 1. None appears for the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr. Atul Rai, learned counsel appears for the respondents-C.C.L. 3. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for quashing the order dated 05.01.2011 whereby the claim of the petitioner for employment on compassionate ground has been rejected. 4. It is contended in the writ petition that the petitioner’s husband late Mangtu Ram was a permanent employee of the C.C.L. and he was in continuous service till his death on 10.07.2007. It is also contended in the writ petition that the petitioner’s husband was suffering from mental dis-balance w.e.f. 02.08.2008 for which he was under continuous medical treatment of Dr. Bimlendu Kumar Singh. It is also contended in the writ petition that after the death of her husband the petitioner received an office order dated 17.08.2007 by which the late Mangtu Ram was terminated from the service on the basis of the enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officer. The petitioner made an application for employment on compassionate ground under the N.C.W.A.. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents-C.C.L. submits that as the husband of the petitioner was absenting from the duty unauthorisedly and without information w.e.f. 02.08.2002. He was charge sheeted on 17.07.2006 but he did not submit any reply and thereafter the termination order dated 17.08.2007 has been passed. He further submits that application has been filed by the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground after the prescribed period of limitation and as such the impugned order dated 05.01.2011 has been passed. 6. Be that as it may, it transpires from the impugned order that the termination of the husband of the petitioner has been given w.e.f. 17.08.2007 whereas the husband of the petitioner was died on 01.07.2007. As no dismissal order can be passed against the dead person as such the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eye of law. 7. Accordingly, the matter is remitted back to the C.C.L. particularly to the respondent nos. 2 and 4 and in turn they will decide the claim of the petitioner in view of the provisions made under N.C.W.A. within a period of eight weeks’ from the date of production of a copy of this order. It goes without saying that if the decisions arrived by the respondents be communicated to the petitioner within two weeks’ thereafter. 8. It goes without saying that if the decisions arrived by the respondents be communicated to the petitioner within two weeks’ thereafter. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands allowed and disposed of. 9. Accordingly, I.A., if any stands disposed of.