JUDGMENT : Heard Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. No one appears on behalf of the respondents. 2. In this writ application, the prayer of the petitioner is for quashing of the award dated 07.08.2000 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 13/1993, by which the reference has been answered in favour of the concerned workman and it was held that the action of the management in denying employment to Keso Mahato younger brother of late Ram Nath Mahato is not justified and accordingly it was directed that employment be provided to the said workman. 3. It is the case of the workmen that late Ram Nath Mahato was working in a permanent capacity as an Electrical Helper in Sudamdhi Project under Sudamdih Area of M/s B.C.C.L. During employment late Ram Nath Mahato fell sick and was referred to Central Hospital, Dhanbad for treatment and after examination he was detected to be suffering from Tuberculosis and was subsequently referred to Ram Krishna Mission Tuberculosis Sanotorium, Ranchi for treatment. After treatment which continued till 27.02.1984, he was declared fit to resume duties on surface and do such work which does not involve severe physical strain. 4. It is the case of the workmen that late Ram Nath Mahato resumed his duties but unfortunately after some months, he expired on 25.09.1985. After the death of late Ram Nath Mahato his wife Smt. Bimla Devi started demanding employment for the younger brother of late Ram Nath Mahato namely Shri Keso Mahato for which an affidavit was also submitted by her but on one pretext or the other the management had denied to address the claim raised by her in providing employment to Shri Keso Mahato. 5. The case of the management is that there was no employer employee relationship between the management and Shri Keso Mahato who was demanding employment under the management. It has been averred that late Ram Nath Mahato was working in the Shaft mine of Sudamdhi Colliery as Electrical Helper in the year 1982. He went on leave in the month of December, 1982 and was to report for his duty on 02.01.1983 after expiry of his leave. It has been averred that late Ram Nath Mahato was working in the Shaft mine of Sudamdhi Colliery as Electrical Helper in the year 1982. He went on leave in the month of December, 1982 and was to report for his duty on 02.01.1983 after expiry of his leave. It has further been stated that late Ram Nath Mahato did not report for duty from 02.01.1983 onwards and accordingly since it was presumed that he has abandoned his service vide letter dated 29.10/02.11.1983 he was informed that he was placed in the Badli list according to the provisions of the Certified Standing Order. 6. It is the further case of the management that late Ram Nath Mahato appeared on 17.03.1984 and prayed to the management to allow him to work as a Badli workman on regular basis. The management allowed him to work from 17.03.1984 as Badli workman in order to ensure that he gets regular employment for completing 240 days of attendance on the surface so as to make him permanent. It has been stated that there was irregular presence of late Ram Nath Mahato and ultimately he died on 25.09.1985. It has been stated that late Ram Nath Mahato was a Badli worker and therefore only a dependent of a workman who remains on service on the date of his death can get employment under the provisions of the National Coal Wage Agreement. The management further has stated that the plea of employment as demanded by Shri Keso Mahato could not be accepted since he was not residing with the deceased-workman and was not wholly dependent on the earnings of the deceased-workman. 7. Since it was claimed by the concerned workman that the management was not accepting his demands for compassionate appointment an Industrial dispute was raised by the Union and the conciliation proceedings failed at which a failure report was sent to the appropriate Govt. for reference. Vide Order No. L-20012(96)/88-D4 (A)/I.R. (Coal-I), New Delhi dated 01.02.1993 the Ministry of Labour of the Government of India had referred the Industrial dispute for adjudication and the schedule of the reference reads as follows: “Whether the action of the management of Sudamdih Project of M/s. B.C.C.L. in denying the employment to Shri Keso Mahato, younger brother of late Ram Nath Mahato is justified? If not, to what relief, his younger brother, Shri Keso Mahato is entitled.” 8. If not, to what relief, his younger brother, Shri Keso Mahato is entitled.” 8. The tribunal had passed an award on 07.08.2000 in Reference Case No. 13 of 1993 in which it was held that the action of the management of Sudamdih Project of M/s. B.C.C.L. in denying employment to Keso Mahato younger brother of late Ram Nath Mahato was not justified and he is entitled for employment and accordingly it was directed that the management of Sudamdih Project of M/s B.C.C.L., shall provide employment to Shri Keso Mahato as a General Mazdoor Category-I within 30 days from the date of publication of the award, failing which he shall be entitled for wages of General Mazdoor Category-I with effect from one month after the date of publication of the award. 9. Assailing the impugned award dated 07.08.2000, it has been submitted by Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner that late Ram Nath Mahato was a permanent employee of M/s. B.C.C.L., but on account of his long and unauthorized absence he was placed in the Badli list and therefore since there was no permanency of service so far as late Ram Nath Mahato is concerned there is no provision for compassionate appointment under the National Coal Wage Agreement. The concerned workman Shri Keso Mahato could not have claimed compassionate appointment and this fact has been totally ignored by the learned Tribunal. It has further been submitted that the learned Tribunal had acted beyond the terms of the reference in as much as while coming to a conclusion it has been held that the management cannot put a permanent workman in Badli list when he had proceeded on authorized leave and has been referred for treatment by the management itself. Learned counsel submits that the terms of reference never included the subject regarding keeping late Ram Nath Mahato in the Badli list and was only confined with respect to non-providing of employment to Shri Keso Mahato who was the younger brother of late Ram Nath Mahato. Mr. Mehta, thus submits that the award is beyond the factual and legal parameters and therefore this Court has the power to re-appreciate the entire issue. More so in view of the fact that the award on the face of it reveals perversity and therefore the same deserves to be quashed and set aside. 10. Mr. Mehta, thus submits that the award is beyond the factual and legal parameters and therefore this Court has the power to re-appreciate the entire issue. More so in view of the fact that the award on the face of it reveals perversity and therefore the same deserves to be quashed and set aside. 10. Although no one has appeared on behalf of the respondent no. 2-Union but the written statement preferred by the Union has been visited and the same merely states about a plea raised by the wife of late Ram Nath Mahato supported by an affidavit for providing employment to Shri Keso Mahato the younger brother of late Ram Nath Mahato. 11. It is to be seen in the facts and circumstances denoted above as to whether late Ram Nath Mahato was kept in the Badli list after loosing permanency on account of abandonment of service and as to whether the learned Presiding Officer, Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal had acted beyond the terms of the reference. The tenor of the impugned award dated 07.08.2000 reveals that the learned Tribunal has accepted the fact that late Ram Nath Mahato was indeed kept in the Badli list of the management. The learned Tribunal has proceeded on the assumption that the management had committed an illegality in keeping late Ram Nath Mahato in the Badli list as he had proceeded on an authorized leave which led to the conclusion that the management could not have denied employment to Shri Keso Mahato the younger brother of late Ram Nath Mahato. Since the issue which has been dealt with by the learned Tribunal was beyond its purview and scope it would apparently reveal that the learned Tribunal had acted beyond the terms of the reference. The only issue which the learned Tribunal was seized with was with respect to non-providing of employment to Keso Mahato. The said issue is directly related to the fact that late Ram Nath Mahato was kept in the Badli list on account of his leave and therefore the question would arise as to whether when late Ram Nath Mahato had already lost permanency in service and kept in the Badli list his so called dependent Shri Keso Mahato could have been provided with compassionate appointment or not. 12. 12. The term Badli workman finds place in the explanation to Section 25(C) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and it means a workman who is employed in an industrial establishment in the place of another workman whose name is borne on the master-rolls of the establishment, but shall cease to be regarded as such for the purposes of this Section, if he has completed one year of continuous service in the establishment. 13. In the case of “Prakash Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd., Versus Rashtriya Mills Mazdoor Sangh” reported in AIR 1986 SC 1514 , it was held that the Badli workmen are really casual employees, who get work only in the absence, temporary or otherwise of regular employees, but they do not have any guaranteed right to claim employment in place of absentee employees. 14. In the case of “Budge Budge Jute Mills Co. Ltd. Versus Workmen” reported in (1970) 1 LLJ 222 (SC); it was held as follows: “A badli or as special badli is a workman who is appointed in a vacant post or in the post of a permanent workman or a probationer who is temporarily absent.” 15. The connotation of a badli workman would therefore reveal with certainty that they do not have permanency in service and merely fill up or substitute the post of a permanent employee or otherwise who is temporarily absent. A badli workman therefore is basically a casual employee having no permanency of service subject to the explanation in terms of Section 25 (C) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 16. The next question which is to be decided is as to whether the claim of Shri Keso Mahato for being appointed on a compassionate basis in place of late Ram Nath Mahato is justified or not. In this context, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the case of “State of Haryana and Others versus Rani Devi and Another” reported in AIR 1996 SC 2445 , wherein the question to be considered was as to whether compassionate appointment could have been provided to the spouses of the employees who died while working as Apprentice Canal Patwaris. It was held thus: “7. It was held thus: “7. So far as the facts of the present case are concerned, we fail to appreciate as to how the High Court directed that the respondents aforesaid be appointed on compassionate ground when admittedly the respective husbands of the respondents were working as Apprentice Canal Patwaris for the periods mentioned above. If the scheme regarding appointment on compassionate ground is extended to all sorts of casual, ad hoc employees including those who are working as Apprentices, then such scheme cannot be justified on constitutional grounds. It need not be pointed out that appointments on compassionate grounds, are made as a matter, of course, without even requiring the person concerned to face any Selection Committee. In the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana (1994 AIR SCW 2305 at p. 2309) (supra), it was said: “It is obvious from the above observations that the High Court endorses the policy of the State Government to make compassionate appointment in posts equivalent to the posts held by the deceased employees and above Class III and IV. It is unnecessary to reiterate that these observations are contrary to law. If the dependent of the deceased employee finds it below his dignity to accept the post offered, he is free not to do so. The post is not offered to cater to his status but to see the family through the economic calamity”. It was also impressed that appointments on compassionate ground cannot be made after lapse of reasonable period which must be specified in the rules because the right to such employment is not a vested right which can be exercised at any time in future. 8. According to us, when the aforesaid Government Order dated 31-10-1985 extends the benefit of appointment to one of the dependents of the 'deceased employee' the expression 'employee' does not conceive casual or purely ad hoc employee or those who are working as apprentices. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed and the impugned orders on the two writ petitions, filed on behalf of the respondents are set aside. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.” 17. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed and the impugned orders on the two writ petitions, filed on behalf of the respondents are set aside. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.” 17. Applying the matrix of the pronouncement referred to above it can safely be concluded that since late Ram Nath Mahato had lost permanency in service and was kept in the badli list which is in fact connotes a casual worker, no compassionate appointment could have been provided to Shri Keso Mahato, even if it is assumed that he was dependent upon late Ram Nath Mahato. 18. The learned Tribunal has not at all considered these aspects of the matter and has acted beyond the terms of the reference apart from disregarding the fact that no compassionate appointment could be provided to a dependent of a workman placed in the badli list and therefore in view of the factual as well as legal aspects noted above the award passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 13/1993, becomes unsustainable in the eye of law and accordingly the same is hereby quashed and set aside. 19. This writ application stands allowed.