1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.3807 of 2022 ------ Dipak Bauri, son of Subhash Bauri, resident of Village Debiana, P.O. Debiana, P.S. Nirsa, District Dhanbad (Jharkhand). … … Petitioner Versus 1. M/s Eastern Coalfields Limited, represented through the General Manager, Hariajam Colliery, Eastern Coalfields Limited, Mugma Area, P.O. + P.S. Nirsa, District Dhanbad. 2. The Personnel Manager, Eastern Coalfields Limited, Mugma Area, P.O. + P.S. Nirsa, District Dhanbad. 3. The Agent, Hariajam Colliery, Eastern Coalfields Limited, Mugma Area, P.O. + P.S. Nirsa, District Dhanbad. … … Respondents ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Tripathi, Advocate For the Respondent(s): Mr. Rajesh Lala, Advocate ------ 06/ 10.02.2025 Heard learned counsel representing the petitioner and learned counsel representing the respondent – M/s Eastern Coalfields Limited. 2. The petitioner in this case, seeks appointment under the Female Voluntary Retirement Scheme (FVRS) on the ground that his grandmother Sabi Bauri, who was in employment of M/s Eastern Coalfields Limited, had taken the benefit of VRS Scheme and under the FVRS, the appointment should have been given but an imposter was appointed in place of son of Sabi Bauri. 3. Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that since later on it was detected that an imposter had taken appointment, this petitioner who is the grandson of Sabi Bauri, should be appointed. 4. After hearing the parties, I find that admittedly, Sabi Bauri had superannuated by virtue of Scheme i.e. Female Voluntary 2 Retirement Scheme, 1990. The Scheme provided for granting an appointment to the son of a female employee who takes VRS. 5. One Gulzar Seikh, impersonated himself to be Subhash Bauri, son of Sabi Bauri, and had obtained the appointment on 08.01.1991. Later on, he was removed in the year 2021 after this fraud was detected. After his removal, this petitioner applied for grant of appointment under the FVRS. 6. Admittedly, this petitioner was not even born when Sabi Bauri superannuated. Further, as per the said Scheme, it is only the son who could have been appointed. Thus, this petitioner has got no right to get appointment that too, in the year 2025 when Sabi Bauri already superannuated in the year 1990. Further, it has been admitted by the parties that the FVRS has been declared ultra vires by this Court and thereafter the Scheme was also withdrawn and now there is no such Scheme which provides for grant of appointment to the heirs of the female employees who took voluntary retirement. 7. Considering all these facts, I find no merit in the instant writ petition. 8. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Prashant.Cp-2