ORDER : Pramath Patnaik, J. In the instant writ application, the petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of mandamus, commanding upon the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground and further for direction upon the respondents to pay forthwith the entire benefits due to death of his brother, namely Kamal Dusadh who died in harness. 2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the brief facts as delineated in the writ application is that the mother of the petitioner was an employee of the respondent as time rated and was posted at Dhori Colliery of C.C.L. but due to her physical ailment she sought voluntary retirement from service and as per the prevalent rule the brother of the petitioner namely Kamal Dusadh got employment on compassionate ground being one of the dependent of Sakunwa Kamin. The deceased brother of the petitioner namely Kamal Dusadh was posted as time rated at Piparwar Project of C.C.L. Unfortunately, the brother of the petitioner died in harness on 07.01.2009 leaving behind the petitioner, father, mother, brother and sister as per the family detailed certificate vide Annexure-2 and 2/1 of the writ petition. It has been averred in the writ application that after death of the brother, the petitioner submitted an application before the respondent no.5 for appointment on compassionate ground. Again the said application has been followed by another reminder. It has further been averred in the writ application that the mother, the dependent of the petitioner has no objection if the petitioner gets employment. Being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of his grievance. 3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents, controverting the assertion made in the writ application. In the counter affidavit, it has been submitted that Kamal Dusadh died on 07.01.2009 and as per his service record only the name of his mother namely Sakunwa Kamin exist. But none has turned up to receive death benefits including gratuity till date so the management decided to deposit the same before the controlling authority. It has further been submitted that except her mother nobodies name has been recorded in the service excerpt. Further, it has been submitted in the counter affidavit that no such application for compassionate appointment has been received by the Management. It has further been submitted that except her mother nobodies name has been recorded in the service excerpt. Further, it has been submitted in the counter affidavit that no such application for compassionate appointment has been received by the Management. Further, it has been submitted that respondent-CCL being a public sector company forms uniform guidelines as laid down in NCWA, a bipartite agreement between Union and the Management. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the record, it appears that the admissible death benefits has been deposited before the controlling authority and the mother of the petitioner whose name exist in the service excerpt, is at liberty to approach the authority to receive the death benefits including the gratuity. 5. In view of the categorical averments made in the counter affidavit, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to the mother of the petitioner namely, Sakunwa Kamin to approach the competent authority within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of the order to receive the death benefits including the gratuity and the mother of the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the authority for appointment on compassionate ground in favour of the petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.