- (1.) HEARD . Mr. R.P. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A. Bannerji, J.C. to G.A. for the State respondents and with their consent this Writ Application is being disposed off at this stage.
(2.) THE petitioner in the instant case has prayed for quashing the Order dated 12.6.2002 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, West Singbhum, at Chaibasa rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for compassionate appointment. The underlying object behind compassionate appointment is to enable a family to tide over the misery that befalls it on account of the death of the bread winner. However, compassionate appointment must be given immediately after the death and the matter should not be allowed to be kept in abeyance for a long period of time because if such matter is delayed then the very object for which this concept took shape will be frustrated.
(3.) HOWEVER , the facts of this case is totally different and they are that on 24.9.1993 while the father of the petitioner had proceeded to Kolkata for negotiation of the marriage of his daughter he became traceless. All efforts were made to trace him out including filing of an F.I.R. on 20.10.1993. The presumption of death in the case of a man or woman who becomes traceless takes a positive shape only on the expiry of seven years. The seven years period in the facts of this case came to an end on 23.9.2000. It is thereafter that the petitioner 'smother filed an application on 30.1.2001 by Annexure -2 praying that the petitioner be given compassionate appointment. In other words, the aforementioned application was filed just on the expiry of about three months from the date of death and a legal presumption of the same became a reality on the expiry of seven years. Since the respondents apparently were not taking into consideration the aforementioned application, the same gave rise to filing of W.P. (S) No. 4171 of 2001 and by Judgment/Order dated 6.9.2001 the same was disposed off with a direction upon the Superintending Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Jamshedpur Circle to enquire into the matter from the concerned office/the officer Incharge of the Police Station relating to the present situation and thereafter was asked to determine the issue as to whether on presumption of death the benefit of compassionate appointment will be allowed in favour of the petitioner or not. It appears that even thereafter the respondents were sitting over the matter which led to filing of a Contempt Application but it appears that on 15.7.2002, the said Contempt Application was disposed off on account of an affidavit filed stating that the claim of the petitioner had been rejected by Memo dated 12.6.2002. While disposing off the Contempt Application, the petitioner was given liberty to move before an appropriate forum and that is why this Writ Application has been filed challenging the Memo dated 12.6.2002. ;