IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI.
C.M.P. No. 160 of 2010
...
Hiramani ... Petitioner
-V e r s u s-
The State of Jharkhand & Others ... Respondents
...
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.G.R. PATNAIK.
...
For the Petitioner : - Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate
For the Respondents : - J.C. to G.P.-I.
...
2/07.05.2010
This application has been filed by the petitioner seeking modification in
the order dated 22.03.2010 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 3038 of 2007
whereby while disposing of the writ application, a direction was given to the
respondents for paying the petitioner a sum of Rs. One lakh by way of
compensation for the premature death of her husband, together with interest.
2. Learned counsel explains that in the writ application, the relief claimed by
the petitioner was not only for payment of compensation but also for directing the
respondents to consider her claim for compassionate appointment to her son.
Reading out the relevant paragraphs of the order passed in the writ
application by this Court, learned counsel explains that in respect of the
petitioner’s claim for compassionate appointment, this Court had observed on the
basis of the submissions made by the respondents that in the District of Chatra,
the District Compassionate Appointment Committee has considered the case of
the dependents of the deceased employees for the grant of compassionate
appointment and that later, in the year 2003, the State Government has also taken
a decision for considering the cases of such dependents of victims of extremists
violence for grant of compassionate appointment to them. Learned counsel adds
further that having made the above observations, it appears that while granting the
final relief, the directions did not include the consideration for the petitioner’s
claim for compassionate appointment and such omission in the order may not
perhaps have been intended by this court.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent State does inform that the State
Government has taken a decision for considering the case of the dependents of
victims of extremists violence for grant of compassionate appointment to them.
4. It appears from the reading of the order passed by this Court in the writ
application, that after having considered all the aspects including the
Government’s decision in the matter for compassionate appointment to the
dependents of the victims of the extremists violence, no specific direction was
issued to the respondents in this regard and the only direction was given for
payment of compensation amount. It appears that the omission was not intended,
as pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner, and there is no reason why the
directions to the respondents should not be included for considering the
petitioner’s claim for compassionate appointment.
5. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, the directions as
contained in the order dated 22.03.2010 to the respondents shall include, besides
payment of amount of Rs. One lakh by way of compensation to the petitioner, a
further direction to the respondents that they shall also consider the petitioner’s
prayer for grant of compassionate appointment to her son and take an appropriate
decision upon such prayer within two months from the date of receipt/production
of a copy of this order and communicate such decision to the petitioner
effectively.
6. To the above extent, the order dated 22.03.2010 stands modified. If the
certified copies of the order has already been obtained, the necessary corrections,
in the light of the aforesaid modification, shall be included therein.
Let a copy of this order be given to the counsel for the respondents.
(D.G.R. Patnaik, J.)
Birendra/