ORDER : 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for compassionate appointment as her husband, who was an employee of CMPDI, died in harness. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the claim of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that the name of the petitioner does not appear in the service record of the deceased. He further submits that in fact, she was married to the deceased on 29.4.2015 and out of their wedlock, one child was born on 5.4.2017 and the deceased died on 7.5.2017. He also submits that because of sudden death of the husband of the petitioner in the year 2017, the husband/employee could not intimate the employer about their marriage as such, the old entry in the service record remained, whose advantage is being taken by her mother-in-law as she applied for appointment of her younger son. He further submits that at least an inquiry should be made by a responsible officer of CMPDI before rejecting the claim of the petitioner. He also submits that as per NCWA, a female dependent will have the option either to accept the monetary compensation or employment and therefore the minor son of the mother of the deceased cannot get employment. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is a Dispute Resolution Committee in the CCL another subsidiary of Coal India Ltd., but in the CMPDI, there is no such committee to look into these type of disputes. He prays that respondent No. 2-the Director (Personnel), CMPDI, be directed to constitute a committee to look into the grievance of the petitioner. 3. The counsel appearing on behalf of CMPDI submits that admittedly the name of the petitioner does not find place in the service record of the deceased and the mother of the deceased has filed an application for grant of compassionate appointment for her younger son, who admittedly is a minor. 4. After hearing the parties, I find that the claim of the petitioner has been rejected only on the basis that the name of the petitioner does not find place in the service record of the deceased. The respondent authorities cannot deny the relationship of the petitioner with the deceased on the basis of service record. 4. After hearing the parties, I find that the claim of the petitioner has been rejected only on the basis that the name of the petitioner does not find place in the service record of the deceased. The respondent authorities cannot deny the relationship of the petitioner with the deceased on the basis of service record. It was incumbent upon the respondent authorities to make a proper inquiry into the matter and then a logical conclusion should have been arrived at, before passing the order impugned. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts, I set aside the impugned order and remit back the matter to respondent No. 2-the Director (Personnel), CMPDI, who will set up a Committee of Officer(s), who will inquire about the marital status of the petitioner with the deceased employee and will submit a report before respondent No. 2, who will pass a fresh order in accordance with law. Enquiry should be concluded within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and a reasoned order will be passed within a period of four weeks thereafter. I also direct the petitioner to co-operate in the entire process. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.