2025:JHHC:12119 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P(S) No. 1859 of 2025 ---- Munesh Kumar, aged about 20 years, s/o Nanhu Pahan, resident of Village-Karo, P.O.- Bachra, P.S.-Piparwar, District-Chatra ..........Petitioner - Versus- 1. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, P.O.-G.P.O., P.S.-Kotwali, District – Ranchi 2. The Director (Personnel), Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, P.O.-G.P.O., P.S.-Kotwali, District- Ranchi. 3. The General Manager (P/MP), Central Coalfields Limited, Bachra Project, Piparwar Area, P.O. & P.S.- Bachra, District – Ranchi 4. The Manager (Personnel), Bachra Project, Piparwar Area, Central Coalfields Limited, P.O. & P.S.- Bachra, District – Ranchi. 5. The Project Officer, Bachra Project, Piparwar Area, Central Coalfields Limited, P.O. & P.S.-Bachra, District – Ranchi 6. The Staff Officer (P & A), Piparwar Area, Central Coalfields Limited, P.O. & P.S.-Bachra, District – Ranchi 7. The Deputy Manager (Personnel), Bachra Project, Piparwar Area, Central Coalfields Limited, P.O. & P.S.- Bachra, District – Ranchi .........Respondents --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN -- For the Petitioner : Mr.Abhishek Sriwastava, Advocate For the Respondents : M/s. A. K. Das, Sankalp Goswami, Advocates -- 02/16.04.2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner for the following relief(s): - i. For quashing of letter no.15/17.10.2024 (Annexure - 6/1) duly issued by the General Manager (P/MP), C.C.L., Ranchi (Respondent No.-3), whereby & whereunder the claim of the petitioner for giving compassionate appointment to him in place of his deceased father, who died in harness, has been rejected on the ground of delay, ignoring the fact that application for giving compassionate appointment was 2025:JHHC:12119 2 submitted by the mother of the petitioner well within time. ii. Further, after quashing of the letter dated 15/17.10.2024, direct the respondent authorities to give compassionate appointment to the petitioner, immediately, since he has furnished all required & relevant documents as per the direction given by the respondent authorities. 3. From the pleadings, it appears that the father of the petitioner, who was working as Valveman, Cat-II, Bachra Project, C.C.L., died on 10.12.2016 while he was in service. 4. The grievance of the Petitioner is that he has been denied compassionate appointment though he was entitled for the same. 5. Learned counsel submits that initially his stepmother applied for compassionate appointment; however, she was given only monetary benefit as per the scheme of the Respondent-Company and pursuant thereto; the stepmother of the Petitioner again filed an application on 31.01.2020 for giving appointment to this Petitioner and thereafter the Petitioner himself applied for compassionate appointment on 28.08.2020 (Annexure-4), however, his application has been rejected. 6. After going through the impugned order, admittedly; the application for compassionate appointment has not been filed by the Petitioner within the stipulated period as mentioned in NCWA. Moreover, now the law is well settled that compassionate appointment shall only be given in the case of emergent relief and in the instant case, on the one hand; the monetary benefit has been given to the mother of the Petitioner soon after the death of the deceased employee and on the other hand, the Petitioner had applied for compassionate appointment after almost 4 years from the date of death of his father. 2025:JHHC:12119 3 7. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any error with the letter dated 15/17.10.2024 (Annexure-6/1) and the Petitioner has failed to point out any urgent need for appointment or the reason for fling an application after almost 4 years. 8. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands dismissed. However, no cost. (Deepak Roshan, J.) jk