ORDER :

1. In view of outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, case has been taken up through Video Conferencing and heard at length. Concerned lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding which has been held through Video Conferencing and there is no complaint in respect to audio and video clarity and quality and after hearing at length, the matter is being disposed of finally.

2. Heard the parties.

3. Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the Letter No. 2545, dated 20/21.09.2017, whereby prayer of the petitioner for his appointment on compassionate ground has been rejected by the respondent no. 3. Petitioner has further prayed for a direction upon the respondents to consider his case for appointment on compassionate ground against death of his father.

4. Case of the petitioner, as has been delineated in the writ petition, is that his father was appointed as CWL on 05.05.1974 at Hedger Colliery. While petitioner's father was working to the post of Driller, he was admitted to the Central Hospital, N.K. Dakra on 04.01.2010 and thereafter he was referred to Gandhi Nagar Hospital, Ranchi for better treatment. However, instead of going to Gandhi Nagar Hospital, Ranchi, petitioner's father got himself treated under the supervision of private doctor. However, his conditions deteriorated day-by-day and he could not join his duties since thereafter nor could he report at Gandhi Nagar Hospital. After his long sickness, petitioner's father died in harness on 08.05.2015. Thereafter, family membership certificate was issued by the office of Circle Officer, Keredari vide Memo No. 44, dated 12.09.2015 wherein name of family members dependent on the employee, have been mentioned and petitioner's name found place at Serial No. 1. Thereafter, petitioner made a representation on 28.03.2016 before the respondent no. 4 giving information about death of his father and further prayed for his appointment on compassionate ground. However, vide office order no. 2106, dated 23/24.09.2016, issued under the signature of respondent no. 5, it has been informed to the petitioner that his father's name was already struck off from the roll of Churi Colliery with effect from 08.05.2015. However, case of the petitioner was further processed and forwarded to the Head Office and vide letter no. 2545, dated 20/21.09.2017, respondent no. 3 rejected claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground. Being aggrieved, petitioner has knocked door of this Court on the ground that rejection of claim of the petitioner is wholly unlawful, improper, unjust and without authority of law.

5. Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, very fairly submits that petitioner and his other family members were under impression that as his father was admitted at Central Hospital, N.K. Dakra and was referred to Gandhi Nagar Hospital, Ranchi for further treatment, the Management was having knowledge of his illness. During the intervening period i.e. from the date he fell ill and got admitted i.e. 04.01.2010 to date of death i.e. 08.05.2015, no letter or any communication regarding unauthorized absence or any other communication was ever received from the management, which gave an understanding to the petitioner's father and family members that his illness has been duly acknowledged by the Management and he was under sick leave. Learned counsel further submits that the Management did not ever bother to take pain to find whereabouts of an employee who was very sick. Petitioner was totally dependent upon earnings of his father and after his death he cannot and should not be denied compassionate appointment on technical grounds of long absenteeism. The respondents cannot be allowed to take advantage of their own mistakes. Learned counsel further argues that in the NCWA, there is no stipulation for rejection of claim for compassionate appointment on such frivolous grounds. Respondents cannot deny legal claim of the petitioner for appointm