JUDGMENT

Vikash Jain, J. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents through video conference. Learned counsel for the petitioners hereby undertakes that all defects pointed out by the stamp reporter shall be removed, and compliance with the conditions of the notices of this Court with regard to acceptance of e-filing shall be made, without delay immediately upon resumption of normal physical functioning of the Court, and in any event within one month thereof.

2. The following reliefs as formulated by the petitioners have been claimed in the writ petition.

"A. For issuance of Writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing/setting aside the Order dated 26.04.2019 passed by the Learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna herein after CAT in Original Application No. 050/00049 of 2018 as contained in Annexure-2 of the writ application whereby and whereunder the prayer for appointment of Petitioner No.3 on compassionate ground being the son of 2nd wife of the deceased employee has been rejected and instant OA has been dismissed illegally, without application of Judicious mind and also contrary to the Full Bench judgment of this Hon'ble Court reported in 2019 (2) PLJR 500 and also by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in AIR 2019 SC 666.

(B). For issuance of Writ in the nature of Certiorari for declaring the RBE No.42/2018 dated 21.03.2018 as contained in Annexure-1 of the writ application as null, void, abnitio wrong and contrary to the Full Bench judgment of this Hon'ble Court reported in 2019 (2) PLJR 500 and also by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in AIR 2019 SC 666.

(C) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondents to consider and issue offer of appointment letter on compassionate ground in favor of Petitioner No.3 being son of 2nd wife without any further delay in view of orders so passed by Hon'ble Full Bench of this Hon'ble Court reported in 2019 (2) PLJR 500, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in AIR 2019 SC 666 and also by Hon'ble Madras High Court dated 28.02.2017 upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on 18.09.2017 as contained in Annexure-A/1 and A/2 with Paper Book.

(D) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondents to grant all consequential benefits in favour of the Petitioners.

(E) Any other appropriate relief(s) for which the Petitioners may be entitled to be granted."

3. The short facts of the case according to the petitioners herein, who are the first wife, the second wife and the son of the second wife, respectively, of the deceased late Dharmanand Jha, are that he was the Ex-Gateman under Senior Section Engineer (P. Way), East Central Railway, Raghopur and died in harness on 28.01.2007. A representation was made for compassionate appointment in favour of petitioner no.3 but no action was taken by the concerned authorities. Accordingly, the petitioners filed O.A. No.050/00049/18 (Annexure-2) but the same has been dismissed by the Tribunal vide its order dated 26.04.2019, inter alia, relying on a decision of the Tribunal passed in O.A. No.050/00910/2016. Such dismissal has been made subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the view taken by the learned Tribunal is contrary to the established law on the subject of compassionate appointment of the son of the second wife of a deceased employee. He relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered on 11.12.2018 in Union of India and Another vs. V.R. Tripathi, (2019) AIR SC 666holding as follows -

"18. The High Court has proceeded on the basis that the recognition of legitimacy in Section 16 is restricted only to the property of the deceased and for no other purpose. The High Court has missed the principle that Section 16(1) treats a child born from a marriage which is null and void as legi