JUDGMENT : Rajesh Shankar, J. : I.A No. 10914 of 2025 The present interlocutory application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to condone the delay of 68 days in filing the present appeal. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the appellants and on being satisfied with the reasons stated in the present interlocutory application, the said delay in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned. 3. I.A. No. 10914 of 2025 is accordingly disposed of. L.P.A. No. 632 of 2024 4. The present appeal has been preferred against the order dated 27.08.2024 passed in W.P.(S) No. 7260 of 2023 whereby prayer of the writ petitioner/respondent herein has been allowed by directing the respondents/appellants to pay her entire monetary compensation and arrear thereof with effect from 13.04.1998 i.e., the date of her application filed for compassionate appointment. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the husband of the respondent namely Lodga Manjhi, who was working as ‘Timber Helper’ in Urimari Underground Project under Barka Sayal Area, died in harness on 20.10.1997. The respondent being the widow of the deceased employee submitted an application on 13.04.1998 seeking compassionate appointment before the appellant no. 6-the Personal Manager, Urimari UG Project, Barka Sayal Area, CCL which was rejected vide order as contained in letter dated 16/17.01.2002. 6. Thereafter, she made an application for monetary compensation after a huge delay of 20 years i.e. on 07.04.2022 which remained pending. Aggrieved with the said situation, the respondent filed a writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 2764 of 2022 praying for grant of monetary compensation under Clause 9.5.0 of the National Coal Wage Agreement which was disposed of vide order dated 23.08.2022 with a direction to the appellants to consider her case and to pass a speaking and reasoned order on her pending representation after providing her ample opportunity of hearing. 7. It is further submitted that pursuant to the order dated 23.08.2022, the respondent filed a representation before the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, CCL, Darbhanga House, Ranchi on 23.09.2022 which was decided by the appellant no. 3- the General Manager (P & IR), CCL, Ranchi vide reasoned order dated 17.07.2023 whereby the petitioner’s claim of monetary compensation was allowed w.e.f. the first day of the month following the month in which she had submitted her application till the date of completion of 60 years/death, whichever is earlier. 8. 3- the General Manager (P & IR), CCL, Ranchi vide reasoned order dated 17.07.2023 whereby the petitioner’s claim of monetary compensation was allowed w.e.f. the first day of the month following the month in which she had submitted her application till the date of completion of 60 years/death, whichever is earlier. 8. Aggrieved with the said reasoned order, the respondent filed writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 7260 of 2023 claiming monetary compensation with effect from 13.04.1998 i.e., the date on which she had filed her application seeking compassionate appointment. The said writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge vide impugned order dated 27.08.2024 granting monetary compensation to the respondent w.e.f. 13.04.1998. 9. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate that the respondent’s application seeking compassionate appointment was rejected vide order as contained in letter dated 16/17.01.2002 and she approached the appellants for monetary compensation after huge delay of more than 20 years from the said date. 10. It is further argued that the purpose and objective of compassionate appointment is to provide immediate financial relief to the dependent family members. However, the appellants took a lenient view and allowed the monetary compensation to the respondent from the first day of the month falling next to the month of her representation dated 07.04.2022. 11. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the materials available on record. 12. We have gone through a recent judgment rendered by this Court in an identical matter i.e., The Central Coalfields Limited & Others Vs. Sunita Devi (L.P.A No. 42 of 2025) wherein this Court had allowed the monetary compensation to the widow of the deceased from the date she had filed application seeking compassionate appointment by observing as under: - “23. On conjoint consideration of the provisions of NCWA-VI as well as the judgments cited by the learned counsels for the parties it is held that when an application for compassionate appointment is made by a female dependent within the prescribed period for filing of the same and the said application is rejected, such female dependent will be entitled to get monetary compensation from the date of death of the employee. However, when the application for compassionate appointment is made by a female dependent after the stipulated period of six months but not after inordinate delay and her claim for compassionate appointment is rejected, then she will be entitled to get monetary compensation from the date of her application submitted for compassionate appointment. 24. In the case in hand, admittedly the respondent was below 45 years of age at the time of death of her husband and as such she had two options i.e., either to apply for compassionate appointment or to seek monetary compensation. The respondent had chosen to claim for compassionate appointment which was rejected by the Dy. Chief Personnel Manager, Dhori Area, CCL, Bokaro vide order dated 26/27.03.2002 on the ground that the same was not filed within the prescribed period of six months from the date of death of her husband. At the time of rejection of the representation of the respondent, the appellants did not offer her monetary compensation. We are of the view that since the claim of the respondent for appointment on compassionate ground was rejected on the ground of delay in submitting such application, she was entitled to be paid the monetary compensation and as a model employer, the appellants should have offered monetary compensation to her, however, they failed to do so. The respondent having filed the application belatedly was neither granted compassionate appointment nor any monetary compensation to which she was entitled in terms of the provisions of NCWA-VI. 25. Thus, as per the entire scheme of the NCWA-VI, we are of the view that the respondent cannot be given benefit for the delay on her part in making the application for compassionate appointment and at the same time the appellants also cannot be allowed to take benefit for their own latches in not offering the monetary compensation to the respondent while rejecting her claim for compassionate appointment.” 13. In the aforesaid case, this Court has specifically held that when the application for compassionate appointment is made by a female dependent after the stipulated period of six months but not after inordinate delay and her claim for compassionate appointment is rejected, she will be entitled to get monetary compensation from the date of her application seeking compassionate appointment. 14. In the aforesaid case, this Court has specifically held that when the application for compassionate appointment is made by a female dependent after the stipulated period of six months but not after inordinate delay and her claim for compassionate appointment is rejected, she will be entitled to get monetary compensation from the date of her application seeking compassionate appointment. 14. In the present case, on perusal of the record, it is evident that the respondent had filed application seeking compassionate appointment on 13.04.1998 and as such she was entitled to get monetary compensation with effect from the said date and not from the date she had made representation for monetary compensation. 15. We are of the view that the learned Single Judge has rightly awarded the monetary compensation to the respondent with effect from 13.04.1998 and thus find no infirmity in the impugned order. 16. The instant appeal being devoid of merit is, accordingly, dismissed. 17. The pending application(s), if any, stands closed.