2026:JHHC:11785 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 2348 of 2026 ---------- Sunil Nonia, aged about 35 years, s/o. late Rajendra Nonia, R/o. Bichla Mohalla, Near Durga Mandap, Kedla Chowk, P.O. Kedla, P.S. Kedla, Dist. Ramgarh, Jharkhand. ………. Petitioner Versus 1. Central Coal Limited (CCL), through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Darbhanga House, Kutchery Road, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. Director (Human Resources), Central Coal Fields Ltd., Darbhanga House, Kutchery Road, P.O. G.P.O., P.S. Kotwali, Dist. Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. General Manager (Human Resource), Hazaribagh Area, Central Coal Field Ltd., P.O. & P.S. Charhi, Dist. Hazaribagh. 4. Sanjay Nonia, S/o. late Rajendra Nonia, R/o. Bichla Mohalla, Near Durga Mandap, Kedla Chowk, P.O. Kedla, P.S. Kedla, Dist. Ramghar, Jharkhand. ………. Respondents. ---------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Kr. Dubey, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Amit Kr. Sinha, Advocate ---------- 02/22.04.2026 The defects pointed-out by the Office are hereby ignored. 2. The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for quashing the appointment of his younger brother (respondent No. 4), who has been appointed on compassionate ground behind the back of petitioner and that too without any intimation regarding rejection of the candidature of the petitioner. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though he has represented before the concerned respondents but they have not taken any decision. Accordingly, the respondents may be directed to consider his representation and pass reasoned order to the effect that though the petitioner happens to be the eldest son of the deceased employee and his name figures in the service excerpts of his father but ignoring the same, how the respondent No. 4 has been appointed on compassionate ground. 4. In response, learned counsel for the respondents submits that they have already given appointment to the respondent No. 4 and as per policy, only one dependent can be appointed on compassionate 2026:JHHC:11785 2 ground. However, since petitioner has already given a representation before the concerned authority and since no counter-affidavit has been filed; as such, the petitioner, if so wishes, may approach the respondent No. 3 for redressal of his grievances. 5. Having regard to the factual scenario that the respondent- Company can give only one appointment but since the petitioner being the eldest son of the deceased employee and still not preferred, he is at liberty to file fresh representation before the 3rd respondent within a period of four weeks from today. 6. The moment the respondent No. 3 will receive any such representation, he shall take decision by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulations within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. 7. It goes without saying that if the decision would be in favour of the petitioner, the same shall be made after hearing respondent No.4. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. 9. Pending I.A. No. 4255 of 2026 stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 22nd April, 2026 kunal/- Uploaded on 04.05.2026