HULAS RAM Vs. CENTRAL COAL FIELDS LTD
LAWS(JHAR)-2004-4-65
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on April 23,2004

Hulas Ram, Binu Singh Munda, Baban Ram And Maheshwar Manjhi Appellant
VERSUS
Central Coal Fields Ltd.Through Its Cmd Respondents

JUDGEMENT

M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) IN all these writ petitions since common question of law and facts are involved the same have been heard together and are disposed of by this common order.
(2.) IN WPS No. 1721 of 2004 the petitioner 'sfather while in service of the respondent died in harness on 6.11.1999. As per the provision of National Coal Wage Agreement -V (NCWA -V) the petitioner filed application on 17.2.2000 for compassionate appointment. The said application was forwarded by respondent Nos. 6 and 7 namely, the Project Officer and the Chief General Manager of CCL. While recommending the case, the Deputy Chief Personnel Manager informed his higher authority that the petitioner is 17 years old and, therefore, mother should get compensation of Rs. 3000.00 per month and the name of the petitioner be kept in live roster. A copy of the said representation has been annexed as Annexure -4 to the writ petition. Curiously enough in 2002 the petitioner was informed by the impugned letter dated 29/30.4.02 that the Committee decided not to consider the case of the petitioner on the ground that the deceased employee died on 6.11.1999 and the application was submitted on 27.6.2000. In WPS No. 1955 of 2004 the petitioner 'sfather died on 22.1.1999 while in the service of the respondent. The petitioner submitted application on 22.9.1999. Only after about three years the petitioner was informed by letter dated 13.9.2002 that his application was considered and rejected on the ground that the application was submitted beyond the period of six months.
(3.) SIMILARLY in WPS No. 1696 of 2004 the petitioner 'sfather while in the service of the respondent as Pump Khalasi died in harness on 14.1.1998 and on 14.8.1998 application was filed for compassionate appointment. After about six years application was rejected on the ground that it was filed after the lapse of seven months instead of six months.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.