PER VIRENDER SINGH, C.J. - (1.) I. A No. 2907/2016 For the reasons carved out in the application and there being delay of 90 days in filing the accompanied appeal, to which counsel for the respondents has not raised any serious objection, the said delay stands condoned. I. A No. 2907/2016 is accordingly allowed. L.P.A No. 225 of 2016 Heard learned counsel for both the sides.
(2.) While declining the claim of the appellant -writ petitioners (hereinafter to be referred to as petitioners) for compassionate appointment being a stale matter, with regard to monetary benefits, the learned Writ Court has given liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority of respondent - C.C.L (Project Officer, Ara Colliery, Mandu, Ramgarh) for according consideration to the same in accordance with law. Assailing the impugned judgment,Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioners were entitled to compassionate appointment, as all the pending applications for compassionate appointments including the application of the petitioner were to be dealt with in accordance with clause 9.3.2 and 9.4.0 of N.C.W.A. He submitted that the application submitted by the petitioners remained pending before the respondent -C.C.L. and at one stage, finding certain defects a communication was also sent to the petitioners on 25.2.2004 to remove the said defects, which were removed, but despite that their case for compassionate appointment was not considered by the respondent -C.C.L. According to Mr. Rajesh Kumar, since the matter got delayed at the end of respondent -C.C.L. only, it should not have been rejected by the learned writ court on the ground that it was not tenable after such length of time, which argument is refuted by Mr. Rajesh Lala appearing for the respondents. He however states that he is not aware as to whether any application moved by the petitioners was not considered by C.C.L.
(3.) Be that as it may. In case any application submitted by the petitioners is still pending consideration with respondent -C.C.L since 2004, as stated by Mr. Rajesh Kumar, it requires to be accorded consideration by passing an order, positive or adverse. Viewed such the view taken by the learned Writ Court that the claim for compassionate appointment is not tenable after considerable length of time deserves to be disturbed. Ordered accordingly.;