( 2026:JHHC:26520 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P(S). No. 6556 of 2026 ---- Baram Deo, aged about 44 years, Son of Ram Raj, Resident of Shiv Mandir, Near North Jealgora No. 4, P.O. & P.S.-Jorapokhar, Dist.- Dhanbad .......Petitioner(s) Versus 1. M/s Bharat Coking Coal Limited represented through its Chairman cum Managing Director, office at Koyala Bhawan, P.O ٠-Koyala Nagar, Dist.- Dhanbad. 2. The General Manager, Lodhna Area, B.C.C.L., P.O.& P.S.-Putki, Dist.- Dhanbad. 3. The General Manager (Human Resources) M.P. & R Department, Lodhna Area, BCCL, P.O. & P.S.-Putki, Dist.-Dhanbad. 4. The Project Officer, Jealgora Colliery, Lodhna Area, B.C.C.L., P.O. & P.S.-Putki, Dist.-Dhanbad. .....Respondent(s) --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --- For the Petitioners : Mr. Sanjay Prasad, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Anupam Shandilya, Advocate : Mr. Pradyot Chatterjee, Advocate --- 05/ Dated: 31.08.2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner(s) praying therein for the following reliefs: i) For quashing of Letter No. 130 (R) dated 02.12.2025 (Annexure-8) issued by Respondent No. 3 whereby and whereunder claim of the petitioner for providing compassionate appointment on account of death of his mother Late Karora Devi, Ex-General Mazdoor, in harness, has been rejected. ii) For direction upon the respondents to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner in accordance with 9.3.3 of NCWA in view of the fact that the mother of the petitioner ex-General Mazdoor died in harness. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that claim of the petitioner for providing compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground that his age is 42-45 years as per assessment medical board. The petitioner further submits that the date of birth of petitioner is admittedly 10.03.1981 ( 2026:JHHC:26520 ) and the same has been relied by the respondent and it is also admitted fact that the age of the petitioner at the time of death of his mother was only 30 years and he was eligible for compassionate appointment but the respondent in order to escape from their own illegalities conducted Medical Board after much delay to rectify their own mistake and the said action is wholly illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, as such the respondent may be directed to revisit with the order. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that since no counter affidavit has been filed; as such the petitioner(s) may approach the 4th respondent for redressal of his grievance. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions and looking to the prayer made in the instant writ application, the same is hereby disposed of by directing the petitioner to approach the 4th respondent by filing a fresh representation along with all relevant documents. The moment the 4th respondent receives the representation of petitioner then he will verify the record of the case and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. 6. It goes without saying that if the decision is taken in favour of the petitioner, necessary consequential order be passed within a further period of 2 weeks. 7. It also goes without saying that while passing the fresh order pursuant to the fresh representation the concerned respondent shall not be prejudiced by the impugned order and shall pass the order strictly in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 31.08.2026 Abha/-