1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.3307 of 2006 (Smt. Shobhabai wd/o. Murlidhar Ramaji Chankapure .vs. Chief General Manager, W.C.L.) =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- CORAM : D.D.Sinha and Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, JJ. DATE : January 07, 2008. Heard Mr. B. Lahiri, Adv. for the Petitioner and Mr.S.C.Mehadia, Adv. for the Respondent. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is widow of Murlidhar Ramaji Chankapure, who was the ex-employee of the respondent and who died during the course of his employment and therefore, the sons of the petitioner are entitled to get appointment on compassionate ground in view of policy of the respondent. It is contended that the respondent, without any justification disallowed the claim of sons of the petitioner for grant of appointment on compassionate ground. Mr.Mehadia, learned counsel for the respondent has brought to our notice clause no. 3.6 (iii) in the National Coal Wage Agreement-V which reads thus : “Clause 3.6 (iii) : 2 In case of death either in mine accident or for other reasons or medical unfitness under Clause 9.4.0 (NCWA-V), if no employment has been offered and the male dependent of the concerned worker is 15 years and above in age, he will be kept on a live roster and would be provided employment commensurate with his skill and qualification when he attains the age of 18 years. During the period the male dependent is on live roster, the female dependent will be paid monetary compensation as per rates at paras (i) & (ii) above (Cl. 9.5.0(iii).” It is further contended that, when the husband of the petitioner died, the sons of the petitioner were 11 and 12 years of age and therefore, they are not entitled to get benefit in view of the above referred clause. Considered the contentions. Perused the relevant clause of the agreement. Since it is not in dispute that, at the relevant time, sons of the petitioner were below the age of 15 years, in view of the above referred clause of the agreement, it is difficult for us to agree with the contentions canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petition suffers from lack of merits, hence, the same is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE ssj