Sanjeeban Mahali vs Uranimum Corporation of India Limited

Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.—Heard the parties.

In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for appointment on compassionate ground in place of his deceased father, who died in harness on 03.02.2009 and further prayed for disposal of his representation which is pending since 13.11.2015.

The factual exposition, as has been delineated in the writ application is that father of the petitioner-Somai Charan Mahali was a permanent employee of Uranium Corporation of India Limited, Jadugora and was working as Drilling Assistant, who died in harness on 03.02.2009 before his actual date of retirement leaving behind his widow, two sons and two daughters. In the year 2009, all the children of deceased employee were minor and therefore the mother of the petitioner made an representation dated 01.07.2009 claiming compassionate appointment but till date no order has been passed.

Mr. Saibal Mitra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that U.C.I.L., Jadugora is a Government of India Enterprise and the scheme for compassionate appointment framed on 09.10.1998 is fully applicable in the case of the petitioner. He further submits that at the time of his death the petitioner was minor and his educational qualification was Intermediate. Soon after attaining the age of majority the petitioner has also send a representation dated 13.11.2015 to General Manager, U.C.I.L., Jadugora and requested him for consideration of his case regarding compassionate appointment. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as the father of petitioner died in harness, entire family of the petitioner is at the verge of starvation and prays for compassionate appointment and till date respondents have not passed any order and as such a direction be given to the respondent authorities for disposal of the representation in accordance with law.

Learned counsel, Mr. M.B. Lal makes his appearance on behalf of Uranium Corporation of India Limited. The respondents have filed counter affidavit. Learned counsel, Mr. M.B. Lal draws the attention of this Court towards Paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 of the counter affidavit which reads as follows:

"6. That the respondent company is engaged in mining of Uranium Ores and there has been shrinkage of uranium ore in view of the depletion of Uranium Ore in the respondents Mines in the State of Jharkhand and shrinkage of ores has reduced requirement of large number of labour force.

That a compassionate appointment is not a fundamental right. The employment is considered to be grant of relief to the family from the financial destitution and to help it to get over the emergent situation immediately after the death of the bread earner who happens to be an employee of the Uranium Corporation of India Ltd.

That in the instant case, the father of the petitioner Late Somai Charan Mahali died in the year 03.02.2009 and the family is surviving within those years, therefore, there is no right to be considered."

In course of argument, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent authorities are unable to make any appointment on compassionate ground. Learned counsel for the respondent further submits that if the petitioner files a fresh representation that will be considered within a period of four weeks after filing of the representation.

Having heard the rival contention of the parties, this Court is of the view that any compassionate appointment is to be made in view of the scheme as framed by Uranium Corporation of India Limited. As far as representation of the petitioner is concerned, admittedly, till date the respondent authorities have not passed any order. In view of the rival submissions of the parties and in view of the fact that if any representation is filed or pending before the respondent authorities, the respondent authorities-Uranium Corporation of India Limited shall pass reasoned order on the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of four weeks after filing of fresh representation.

Needless to say if the case of the petitioner is found fit for compassionate appointment, the respondent authorities shall consider the same and issue appointment letter within a further period of four weeks.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.