JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioner has approached before this Court with a prayer for quashing the order dated 25/28.07.2020, passed by respondent no. 5, whereby claim of the petitioner for employment under Clause 9.3.2 of NCWA has been rejected by totally non-speaking order. Petitioner has further prayed for quashing the order dated 24.05.2011, passed by respondent no. 7 whereby husband of the petitioner – Saldeo Oraon was removed from service after his death on 18.04.2011 and on this account the order dated 24.05.2011 of removal from service is void-ab-initio and nullity of law in view of fact that no order of removal from service can be passed against a dead person as departmental proceeding automatically lapses/ terminates/abates against the employee by reason of death. Petitioner has further prayed for a direction upon the respondents to consider his claim for employment in the respondent Company under the provision of Clause 9.3.2 of NCWA.

3. As per factual matrix, husband of the petitioner namely Saldeo Oraon was appointed in the service of M/s. CCL in Argadda Colliery on 09.10.1990 as Piece Rated worker and thereafter he performed his duties with utmost sincerity and punctuality. Petitioner’s husband suffered from depression in August, 2007 and, therefore, he consulted the Company’s doctor on various dates. Thereafter, all of a sudden on 16.10.2007, petitioner’s husband left the house at around 11:00 p.m, and did not return back. On 28.10.2007 petitioner lodged ‘Sanha’ in Giddi Police Station, Hazaribagh regarding missing of her husband which was entered vide Station Diary No. 406/2007, dated 28.10.2007. Thereafter due information was also given to the respondents along with a copy of missing report. After missing of the husband, petitioner was left alone to support five minor daughters and one son. Petitioner regularly represented before the respondents to support her, but no heed was paid. Thereafter, on 24.04.2011, petitioner came to know that her husband had already died in a village in Latehar. Thereafter, the information regarding his death was given to the respondents with a request to appoint her in service. Death certificate of the deceased was also given to the respondents with further reminder to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground under Clause 9.3.2 of NCWA.

4. Upon the repeated representation of the petitioner, her case was duly examined for appointment under Clause 9.3.2 of NCWA and petitioner was asked to appear before the Screening Committee on 08.02.2014. Thereafter, matter was sent before the CCL Headquarter. However, vide letter dated 25/28.07.2020, claim of the petitioner was rejected by totally non-speaking order. Petitioner was also served with office order dated 24.05.2011, which was order of removal from service of the deceased husband of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner has knocked door of this Court.

5. Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vociferously argues that petitioner is entitled for compassionate appointment in view of Standing Orders i.e. Clause 9.3.2 of NCWA. Learned counsel further argues that earlier also Management had considered appointment of the petitioner on the ground of death. The deceased husband was the sole bread earner of the family and as he has died, one of the eligible members of his family was entitled for appointment on compassionate ground under the provisions of Clause 9.3.2 of NCWA. Learned counsel further argues that no reason has been assigned in the impugned order rather the order is cryptic, non-speaking and capricious. Drawing attention of the Court towards counter affidavit, learned counsel submits that though in paragraph-21, several reasons have been assigned in which it has clearly been mentioned that since husband of the petitioner was terminated from the service, no compassionate appointment can be issued against a dismissed person. The said contention of the respondents