ORDER :

[Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.]

1. Office has pointed out the defect that the court fee to the tune of Rs. 20/- has not been deposited by the appellant.

2. Considering the aforesaid defect, office is directed to supply the certified copy to the appellant subject of deposit of court fee to the tune of Rs. 20/-

I.A. No. 6295 of 2015:

3. This interlocutory application has been filed for condoning the delay of 373 days, which has occurred in preferring this appeal.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

5. Having regard to the averments made in this application, we are of the view that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the period of limitation.

6. Accordingly, I.A. No. 6295 of 2015 is allowed and the delay of 373 days in preferring the appeal is condoned.

L.P.A. No. 646 of 2015:

7. The instant appeal under clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order/judgment dated 02.09.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 4752 of 2013, whereby and whereunder, the claim of the writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground on account of death of his father, who died in harness on 23.12.1994, which had been rejected vide order dated 16/20.09.1999, has been refused to be interfered with by dismissing the writ petition.

8. The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made in the writ petition, which requires to be enumerated, reads as under:

The case of the writ petitioner as would appear from the pleading is that his father, namely, late Govind Bouri, was working under the respondent-BCCL and had died in harness on 23.12.1994. Application had been filed for consideration of his case for appointment on compassionate ground on the basis of the agreement as under National Coal Wage Agreement, but, his application had been rejected vide order dated 16/20.09.1999.

The writ petitioner, being aggrieved with the aforesaid order, preferred writ petition being CWJC No. 3006 of 2000 which was disposed of on 09.05.2002 remitting the matter before the respondent to consider the case of the writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground. In pursuance thereof, the claim for appointment on compassionate ground was again rejected by the respondent-BCCL vide order dated 28/29.01.2003 on the ground that his mother Shali Bouri is already working in the company.

The writ petitioner, again challenged the said order by filing writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 1506 of 2003 but the same was dismissed vide order dated 06.07.2006 on the ground that the petitioner's mother Smt. Shali Bouri is also working in the company. The writ petitioner, being aggrieved with the order passed by the co-ordinate learned Single Judge of this Court, preferred letters patent appeal being L.P.A. No. 348 of 2006 but the same had been withdrawn as would appear from the order dated 19.09.2006 appended as Annexure-2 to the paperbook.

The writ petitioner, thereafter, again approached this Court by filing writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 4752 of 2013 on the ground that the respondent-BCCL is having policy decision as contained in letter dated 01.07.2003 and 11.01.2008 to the effect that the appointment on compassionate ground can be provided even if mother or any dependant of the deceased employee is working under the establishment. The writ petition had been dismissed by the co-ordinate learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 02.09.2014 on the ground that the issue for appointment on compassionate ground has been set at rest by declining to interfere with the rejection of the claim as has been done vide order dated 16/20.09.1999 by a co-ordinate learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 06.07.2006 in W.P.(S) No. 1506 of 2003. Letters patent appeal was also filed but the same had been withdrawn. The learned Single Judge in that pretext had dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the issue has attained its finality, as such, the said chapter cannot be allowed to be opened again, whi