Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) In the accompanied writ application, the petitioner being elder son of late Chhatrabali Beldar a permanent employee of BCCL has called in question the compassionate appointment of his younger brother, respondent no.6 without any opportunity of hearing and that too behind his back and the petitioner has further prayed for cancellation of the appointment of respondent no.6 and to grant him compassionate appointment in place of respondent no.6.
(2.) The facts as has been delineated in the writ application in a nutshell is that petitioner's father was a permanent employee of the respondent-BCCL and was working as Shovel Operator at Dhanbad. While working as such father of the petitioner died on 30.10.2013 leaving behind the mother of the petitioner, three sons and two daughters. After death of his father, the petitioner submitted his application for compassionate appointment which was subsequently followed by reminders. The petitioner was informed by the respondent to resolve the family dispute. Thereafter, two advocate notices were sent alongwith representations not to take any decision in favour of any dependent of deceased employee till the family dispute was resolved. The petitioner having come to know on the daily news paper Dainik Jagran that his younger brother, respondent no.6 has been given compassionate appointment, left with no alternative, the petitioner has been constrained to seek remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently submitted that the petitioner being the elder son ought to have been considered for the appointment on compassionate ground but the respondent without giving any opportunity to the petitioner has appointed the respondent no.6 which sans of natural justice is against all cannons of equity and fair play.;