Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) In the instant writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for direction upon the concerned respondents to forthwith give compassionate appointment to the son of the petitioner under clause 9.3.2 of N.C.W.A.
(2.) The facts, as delineated in the writ application, in a nutshell is that while the husband of the petitioner was working as Electrical Fitter in CCL, he was charge-sheeted for unauthorized absence of about 13 days, which led to his dismissal w.e.f 24.12.1994. Being aggrieved, the husband of the petitioner raised an Industrial dispute, which was subsequently referred by the appropriate Government but during pendency of the Reference case before the Tribunal, the workman died on 21.11.2002. However, the Tribunal vide its award dated 22.01.2010 held the dismissal of the workman to be unjustified and directed to pay 50% of the back wages with all consequential benefits. Thereafter, the petitioner vide letter dated 22.12.2010 made a request before respondent no. 2 to provide employment to her son under clause 9.3.2 of N.C.W.A VI, which was denied vide letter dated 22.04.2011 stating therein that since the award does not speak anything about the compassionate appointment of the dependent of the workman, the same cannot be given.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner immediately after the award was passed whereby dismissal of the workman-deceased husband was declared unjustified made an application for compassionate appointment of her son. Learned counsel further submitted that even Regional Labour Commissioner vide its letter dated 11.01.2011 directed the respondent no. 3 to implement the award, wherein it was directed to extend all consequential benefits, and to consider the appointment of the dependent of workman under the provisions of N.C.W.A. VI, but it did not evoke any response rather the same was denied stating since the award does not suggest for compassionate appointment, such benefit cannot be extended. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that only after passing of award whereby order of dismissal was declared unjustified, the petitioner became eligible for consideration of his case for compassionate appointment and the respondents are duty bound to consider such claim as per provisions of NCWA even if for the sake of argument, it is presumed that award does not speak anything. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that on the one hand, the husband of the petitioner was illegally dismissed, which was declared unjustified by the Tribunal and on the other hand even after setting aside of dismissal order are not extending benefit and legal right accrued to the petitioner as per National Coal Wages Agreement.;