The judgment establishes the requirement for a married daughter to prove dependency on the deceased employee for compassionate appointment under NCWA.

JUDGMENT :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

1. The instant intra-court appeal, preferred under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent, is directed against the order/judgment dated 07.07.2022 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No.3974 of 2020 whereby and whereunder the writ petition has been dismissed by declining to interfere with the reasoned order dated 04.11.2020 passed by Respondent No.2 by which the claim of the writ petitioner for compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground that she was already married at the time of death of her father and was residing separately and not dependent on the earnings of her father and, as such, the writ petitioner does not come under term “dependent” for claim of employment under the provision of NCWA.

2. Brief facts of the case as per the pleadings made in the writ proceeding, which are required to be enumerated herein, read as under :-

The father of the writ petitioner, namely Late Bajo Ram was a permanent employee under the respondent-Company and was working as M/Loader (Grade-IV employee) in Simalbahal Colliery of the respondent no.1 died on 02.03.2013 while in service.

3. After the death of her father, the writ petitioner was entitled to get service under the respondents on compassionate ground as per the provisions laid down in NCWA and based on such provision, the writ petitioner applied for her appointment on compassionate ground.

4. The respondent concerned asked the petitioner to get succession certificate to establish her right and against such demand of succession certificate, the petitioner moved before this Court by filing writ application vide W.P.(S) No.3426 of 2015 and this Court vide order dated 12.05.2016 held that the demand of succession certificate was not justified and further observed that the respondent will pass a reasoned order as per law, circular and as per NCWA, on the merit of the case of the writ petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. If the respondent authority finds that the petitioner is entitled to get compassionate appointment, appointment letter will be issued to the petitioner within a month thereafter.

5. Thereafter, in compliance of order passed by this Court dated 12.05.2016, the concerned respondent passed order dated 12.08.2016 and intimated the writ petitioner that she cannot be given employment since her deceased father Bajo Ram had declared in the service record that she was married.

6. Being aggrieved with the order dated 12.08.2016 passed by the concerned respondent, the petitioner moved before this Court by filing writ petition being W.P.(S) No.7320 of 2016 challenging the order dated 12.08.2016 and this Court vide order dated 06.08.2019 disposed of the writ petition by quashing and setting aside the order dated 12.08.2016.

7. The writ petitioner made representation before the respondent-authority requesting therein to consider her claim and provide employment to her on compassionate ground.

8. In pursuance of order passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No.7320 of 2016 dated 6.08.2019, the concerned respondent passed reasoned order dated 04.11.2020 rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was not solely dependent of her deceased father late Bajo Ram, and further she failed to prove her dependency on her father.

9. Being aggrieved with the reasoned order dated 04.11.2020, the writ petitioner again moved before this Court by filing writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 3974 of 2020 which has been dismissed vide order dated 07.07.2022 against which the present intra-court appeal.

10. It is evident from the material available on record that the writ petitioner claims to be the unmarried daughter of Late Bajo Ram who has died on 02.03.2013. Thereafter, she has made application for consideration of her case on compassionate ground in view of the condition stipulated under the NCWA.

11. The said claim was rejected on the ground that she was married daughter and, a