2026:JHHC:19607 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 1842 of 2024 ---------- Rajesh Oraon, aged about 26 years, s/o. Late Dhrup Oraon, R/o. Mohan Nagar, Dakra, P.O.+P.S. Dakra Colliery, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand- 829210. ………. Petitioner Versus 1. Central Coalfields Limited, through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Darbhanga House, P.O. Ranchi University, P.S. Gonda, Dist. Ranchi. 2. Director (Personnel), Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, P.O. Ranchi University, P.S. Gonda, Dist. Ranchi. 3. General Manager (P&IR), Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, P.O. Ranchi University, P.S. Gonda, Dist. Ranchi. 4. Project Officer, Dakra Project, Central Coalfields Limited, P.O. Dakra, P.S. Khelari, Dist. Ranchi. 5. Deputy General Manager (Personnel), Dakra Project, Central Coalfields Limited, P.O. Dakra, P.S. Khelari, Dist. Ranchi. ………. Respondents. ---------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rishikesh Giri, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. M.B. Lal, Advocate ---------- 04/ 03.07.2026 By way of the present writ application the petitioner prays for quashing the Committee Report on verification of genuinity dated 11.09.2023 and thereupon to give appointment to the petitioner on compassionate ground on account of death of his father. 2. The case of the petitioner relates to compassionate appointment. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that when he approached this Court in the 1st round of litigation, this Court vide its order dated 05.05.2023, disposed of the Writ Application being W.P.(S). No. 2719 of 2022, directing the respondent-CCL to constitute a committee to decide the case of the petitioner. Now, the petitioner submits that pursuant thereto, the impugned order has been passed wherein the respondents have relied upon the different documents showing the petitioner’s different age vis-à-vis the documents relied upon by the petitioner. 2026:JHHC:19607 2 4. Therefore, the petitioner confines his arguments only on the issue that the respondents be directed to verify the petitioner’s age by a duly constituted Medical Board and if the Medical Board finds the petitioner between the prescribed age limit, the respondents be directed to issue formal letter of appointment. 5. So far as the prayer made in this writ application is concerned, learned counsel for the respondents opposes the same, however, he fairly admits that if the petitioner approaches the Project Officer, his case will be considered in the way he has submitted hereinabove. 6. Having regard to the limited submission of learned counsel for the parties, the Committee Report on verification of genuinity dated 11.09.2023 is quashed and the petitioner is directed to approach the Project Officer i.e. respondent No. 4 with a detailed representation along with a copy of this order. The moment the respondent No. 4 will receive any such representation, he will constitute a Medical Board for assessing the age of the petitioner and if the Medical Board finds that the petitioner comes within the zone of consideration w.r.t. his age; then necessary order be passed to that effect by issuing appointment letter, alternatively, reject his claim. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 16 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 7. Accordingly, the instant application stands partly allowed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 3rd July, 2026 kunal/- Uploaded 07.07.2026