- (1.) IN this case, the petitioner has prayed for a direction on the respondents to appoint him on compassionate ground. It has been stated that his father died -in -harness on 15.10.1997 while he was posted in Kathara Colliery as Senior Dumper Operator. After the death of the father of the petitioner, he made an application for his appointment on compassionate ground, but the other legal heirs objected. In that situation, the petitioner filed a suit seeking declaration that he is a legal heir, which was decreed in his favour. The petitioner, thereafter, approached the respondents for his appointment on compassionate ground.
(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents, in spite of the said decree of the civil court holding him a legal heir, have not given any heed to the petitioner's application and have not passed any final order on his representation. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents stating, inter alia, that the said judgment and decree of the civil court has been challenged and now a Second Appeal being S.A. No. 292 of 2006 is pending in this Court and on the basis of the said pendency, an objection petition has been filed by one Smt. Geeta Devi claiming herself to be the wife of the deceased. According to the respondents, they have not passed any order in view of the said objection and pendency of the Second Appeal. It has been stated that since there is a dispute of heirship, it is very difficult for the respondents to pass any final order on the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment before final decision of the Second Appeal, pending before this Court.
(3.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances appearing on record, I do not find any arbitrariness or illegality on the part of the respondents, who, in view of the pendency of the Second Appeal, have not passed any final order. The basis of the claim of the petitioner is the judgment and decree of the civil court and that decree is under challenge in the Second Appeal and in that view, not passing any final order by the respondents, during the pendency of the Second Appeal, cannot be said to be an arbitrary and illegal. I, therefore, find no cause for the petitioner for maintaining this writ petition at this stage. With these observations, this writ petition is disposed of.;