Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 regarding a request for compassionate appointment. The Court held that the appropriate remedy lies before the authority under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Writ petition dismissed with liberty to move appropriate authority/forum under the Industrial Disputes Act.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 1622 of 2010
Bihari Manjhi …… Petitioner
Versus
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH For the Petitioner: Mr. Om Prakash Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent-CCL: Mr. A.K. Das, Advocate
06/Dated: 04/12/2019
The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, relief made in para 1 of the writ petition.
Referring to Annexure-9 of the writ petition which is Office order issued under the signature of Personnel Officer, C.C.L dated 22.01.2004, has submitted that the petitioner has represented before the respondents requesting therein to take a final decision in the matter of compassionate appointment under para 9.3.2 of the NCWA and finally vide order dated 2.01.2004, petitioner had been informed that his application for compassionate appointment has been rejected due to late submission.
Referring to Annexure-5 of the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after death of mother, petitioner in a most deplorable condition had filed a representation dated 21.05.1998 and submitted the same to the employer along with relationship certificate dated 28.04.1998 requesting therein to grant compassionate appointment to him.
Further, it has been submitted that the respondents inspite of appeal
of the petitioner had not taken any decision, petitioner filed several representations lastly being on 12.01.2010 but till date no decision has been taken and matter is still pending.
A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent-CCL in which in para 6, it has been stated that from bare perusal of records of the case that the impugned order was passed on 22.01.2004 whereas the instant application was filed on 08.04.2010 i.e after lapse of more than six years since the date of rejection of the claim for compassionate employment and such application is liable to be dismissed.
Further, referring to Annexure 7, it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent- CCL that as per Circular issued for employment on compassionate ground, at the relevant point of time, the limitation for application for employment was required to be made within six months which was subsequently enhanced and one and half years.
In para 14 of the counter-affidavit, it has been stated that proper remedy on the subject in the writ application would lie before the appropriate authority and the forum created under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and as such the writ petition is not maintainable.
In view of the matter, this writ petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, this writ petition is hereby dismissed. However, petitioner is at liberty to move appropriate authority/forum under the Industrial Disputes Act.
(Anant Bijay Singh, J.)
Satyarthi/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking compassionate appointment is maintainable as the appropriate remedy lies under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Whether the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment barred by time limits renders the writ petition dismissed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Bihari Manjhi
Central Coalfields Ltd.
Anant Bijay Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
