Jharkhand High Court
Prem Chand Singh Son Of Late Kuwar ... vs Central Coalfields Limited on 2 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No.455 of 2022
----
Prem Chand Singh son of Late Kuwar Singh Ghatwar, resident of
Jaridih Basti Sotartand, Bermo, PO Jaridih Bazar, PS Gandhi Nagar,
District Bokaro.
... Petitioner
-versus-
1. Central Coalfields Limited, through its Chairman-cum-Managing
Director, at Darbhanga House, District Ranchi.
2. Director (Personnel), Central Coal Fields Limited, At Darbhanga
House, Ranchi.
3. General Manager (P&IR), Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga
House, Ranchi.
4. Chief Manager (P&MP), Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga
House, Ranchi.
4. The General Manager, Central Coal Fields Limited, B&K Area,
Kargali, PS Gandhinagar, Dist. Bokaro.
5. The Staff Officer (P), Central Coal Fields Limited, B&K Area, At & PO
Kargali, PS Gandhinagar, Dist. Bokaro.
6. The Project Officer, A.K.K.O.C.P. Project, Central Coal Fields Limited,
At & P.O. Bokaro, Thermal, PS Bokaro Thermal Power Station, Dist.
Bokaro.
... Respondents
----
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhijeet Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Radha Krishan Gupta, Advocate
----
5/ 02.01.2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for
the respondents.
2. This is a writ of certiorari challenging the letter No.223 dated
01.01/02.2021 issued by the Chief Manager (P/MP), Central Coalfields
Limited, whereby the claim for compassionate appointment of the petitioner
was rejected.
3. Since this is a writ of certiorari and the detail orders and the
grounds for challenge is there in the order itself, it is not necessary to call for
any counter affidavit, as in terms of the judgment in the case of Mohinder
Singh Gill & Anr. Versus Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi &
Others, reported in (1978) 1 SCC 405, no affidavit can supplement the facts
and reasons which were considered for rejecting the application, which are
reflected in the impugned order itself.
4. Father of this petitioner, namely, Kuwar Singh Ghatwar was an
employee of Central Coalfields Limited. He was a Trammer, Category III in the
AKKOCP, B & K Area of Central Coalfields Limited. He died on 21.03.2020 in
harness. Petitioner, being his son, applied for compassionate appointment. It
is the case of the respondents that the date of birth/age of the petitioner, which
was recorded in different service records of his father did not match with each
other. As the respondents felt that there was confusion in respect of the date
of birth of the petitioner, he was subjected to age assessment by a Medical
Committee. The Committee assessed his age to be between 35 and 40 years
as on the date of the assessment. Be it noted that the maximum age for
appointment in Central Coalfields Limited is 35 years. Since his age, on the
date of age assessment, was between 35 and 40 years, the respondents
considered his age as 37 ½ years, i.e., midpoint on the date of age
assessment. Considering the same, it is the case of the respondents that on
the date of application, his age would be more than 35 years, thus, he is not
eligible to be employed in Central Coalfields Limited on compassionate
grounds. It is the case of the petitioner that on the date of age assessment, he
was of 35 to 40 years, whereas he applied for compassionate appointment on
11.05.2020. Be it noted that the age assessment report is dated 28.10.2022. It
is his case that this period of two years should have been granted to the
petitioner and in that case his age should have been less than 37 ½ years,
rather his age should have been 35 years 2 months as on the date of
assessment, but, since this is benefit oriented scheme, his age should have
been treated as less than 35 years.
5. The fact remains that in the month of October 2022, his age was
assessed between 35 and 40 years, whereas application for compassionate
appointment was made in the year 2020. The scheme for grant of
compassionate appointment is to give benefit to the family of the bread winner,
who died in harness, leaving the entire family in financial distress. What would
be the age after due assessment and whether the midpoint can be taken for
the aforesaid purpose has been decided by a Division Bench of this Court in
L.P.A. No.372 of 2021. In the aforesaid judgment, this Court has held that the
lower age limit should be considered as the actual age for the purpose of grant
of compassionate appointment, where the age is assessed by the age
assessment committee. The order passed by this Court was challenged before
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.19183 of 2022,
but, the same was not interfered with. In this case in 2022 lower age limit was
35 years. Application for grant of compassionate appointment is two years
prior to that, which means that his age on the date of application would
definitely be less than 35 years, thus, on the date of application, considering
the judgment of this Court in L.P.A. No.372 of 2021, petitioner was well within
the prescribed age limit for getting employment in Central Coalfields Limited.
6. Considering what has been discussed above, impugned letter
No.223 dated 01.01/02.2021 issued by the Chief Manager (P/MP), Central
Coalfields Limited is hereby set aside. Respondents are directed to take
appropriate decision on grant of compassionate appointment to the petitioner
and issue appropriate orders within a period of six weeks from today.
7. This writ petition is, accordingly, allowed.
(Ananda Sen, J.)
Kumar/Cp-02
