2025:JHHC:31108 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 3838 of 2021 ------ Rajendra Prasad, son of Bhuneshwar Mahto, resident of village Mahkol, P.O Suryapura, P.S. Padma,O. P., District- Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Dy. Commissioner, Hazaribagh. 3. The Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh. 4. The District Commandant, Jharkhand Home Guard Vahini, Hazarigagh. 5. The Director General (Home Guard) Jharkhand, near Rajendra Chowk, Doranda, Ranchi. 6. The General Manager, Central Coalfields Limited (CCL), Hazaribagh Area, Charhi, Hazaribagh. ... Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the petitioner(s): M/s Anil Kumar and Arpit Kumar, Advocates. For the State Mr. Shirsh Mazumdar, AC to SC-II For CCL Ms. Alpana Verma, Advocate. ------ 12/08.10.2025: Heard the parties. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for compassionate appointment and also payment of ex-gratia amount, which the petitioner is entitled to. 3. The wife of the petitioner was Home Guard and was deputed in Central Coalfields Limited (CCL). During course of employment, she expired in road accident. 4. Admittedly, the wife of the petitioner was not employee of CCL and she was not covered by any scheme for grant of compassionate appointment. 5. So far as the State is concerned, at the relevant point of time, there was no scheme for giving compassionate appointment to the dependent of home guard, who died in harness. The only benefit which the dependent of the deceased home guard was entitled to receive is monetary compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-. Admittedly the same ought to be paid by the agency or the Department, in which the Home Guard was deputed. 6. The petitioner is relying upon Rule of 2014, but the same will not help the petitioner as because the wife of this petitioner died on 7.3.2013 i.e. before the enforcement of Rule of 2014. 7. Today, during course of argument, learned counsel for the CCL produces some documents which suggest that the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- has already been transferred in the Account of this petitioner on 25.9.2025. 2. 8. Admittedly the aforesaid quantum was the amount which the dependent of deceased home guard is entitled to receive. 9. Since the ex- gratia amount has already been paid and the fact that the petitioner is not entitled for grant of compassionate appointment, I am of the opinion, the relief which the petitioner legally is entitled to has already been granted. 10. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. Anu/-Cp2. (ANANDA SEN, J.)