- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE appellants are aggrieved against the order of learned Single Judge dated 30.01.2008 passed in W.P.(S) No. 5648 of 2006 by which the petitioners' writ petition has been dismissed. The appellant no.1 is the son of the deceased employee Rama Mahto and appellant no.2 is the wife of the deceased. The employee died on 13.9.1998 while holding the post in the respondent - Company namely C.C.L. The appellant no.2, the widow of deceased employee, applied for compassionate appointment under the Scheme framed namely National Coal Wage Agreement on 12.5.1999. Her application was duly considered and was rejected on 4.11.1999 with objection that age of the appellant no.2 appears to be above 45 years and, therefore, she is not entitled to compassionate appointment. However, she was also informed that she may take monetary compensation benefit in lieu of the employment. The appellant no.2 instead of taking monetary compensation benefit in lieu of employment, submitted an application for compassionate appointment for her son who attained the age of 19 years by the year 2002 and, therefore, her son may be given compassionate appointment under Clause 9.5.0 (iii) of N.C.W.A. The said application was rejected by the respondent -Company vide order dated 31.7.2006 on the ground that since the applicant has applied at a belated stage, his application cannot be entertained. Aggrieved against the said order dated 31.7.2006, the petitioners preferred writ petition which has been dismissed by learned Single Judge. While dismissing the writ petition of the petitioners, learned Single Judge observed that the widow of the employee did not challenge the rejection of claim of her appointment on compassionate ground and even she did not exercise option for monetary compensation in lieu of employment and if petitioner no.1 was eligible to be kept in live roster after the death of employee in 1998 and his name was not kept in live roster, no action was taken in this regard by the petitioners. Learned Single Judge also observed that the monetary compensation is required to be paid during the period the male dependant is kept on live roster with effect from 1.1.2000 till he attains majority, but there has been no claim that petitioner no.1 was eligible for keeping his name on live roster, petitioner no.2 cannot claim monetary compensation in terms of Clause 9.5.0. of the said agreement.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellants Shri Ratnesh Kumar, submitted that N.C.W.A. contains Chapter -IX wherein it is specifically provided that if employee's son is of the age of 12 years or above, then his name will be kept on live roster and he would be provided employment upon attaining the age of 18 years. The appellant no.1 was of the age of 03 years as on 1.4.1987 as per the record of the respondent -Company itself. The appellant no.1 was of the age of 14 years 05 months on 13.9.1998 i.e., at the time of death of his father. The appellant no.1 became major in the month of April, 2002 and submitted an application for compassionate appointment on 20.6.2002, therefore, the petitioner, after attaining the age of majority and after removal of his disability, submitted the application for compassionate appointment which cannot be said to be the application filed belatedly. It is also submitted that till the appellant no.1 could have been given compassionate appointment, her mother i.e. appellant no.2 was entitled to monetary compensation under Clause 9.5.0. It is submitted, therefore, that learned Single Judge has committed error of law in holding that petitioners' application was belated.;