Dipankar Datta, J.

(for the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice & himself)

1. M.A.T. 1299 of 2016, since renumbered F.M.A. 4401 of 2016, is directed against the judgment and order dated May 18, 2016 passed by a learned Judge of this Court (hereafter the said judgment). W.P. 4290 (W) of 2016 (Smt. Putul Rabidas v. The Eastern Coalfields Ltd.), presented by the appellant, was dismissed thereby. Noting that the point involved in W.P. 25878(W) of 2015 (Sefali Banerjee v. The Union of India & ors.) was covered by the said judgment, His Lordship dismissed it too by an order dated June 9, 2016. Such order is impugned in M.A.T. 1279 of 2016, since renumbered F.M.A. 4403 of 2016.

2. It appears on a bare reading of the decisions under appeal that the learned Judge refused relief to the appellants (Putul and Sefali) based on the specific finding that a divorcee daughter of an employee of the Eastern Coalfields Ltd. (hereafter ECL) dying-in-harness is not entitled to the benefit of compassionate appointment/monetary compensation in terms of the National Coal Wages Agreement-VI (hereafter the NCWA-VI).

3. By an order dated September 20, 2016, a Division Bench of this Court had directed analogous hearing of these intra-Court appeals. Subsequently, the appeals were mentioned by the learned advocates for the respective parties before such Division Bench for hearing thereof along with F.M.A. 1277 of 2015 (State of West Bengal & ors. v. Purnima Das & ors.). F.M.A. 1277 of 2015 had by then been referred for decision to a larger Bench and this Bench had been constituted there for. In that appeal, the question whether a married daughter of a State Government employee dying-in-harness is entitled to be considered for compassionate appointment emerged for decision. These appeals having been directed to be heard along with FMA 1277 of 2015 by an administrative order of the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice dated June 6, 2017, the same were placed before us for consideration and decision.

4. We have decided F.M.A. 1277 of 2015 (State of West Bengal & ors. v. Purnima Das & ors.) today by a separate judgment and order, and these appeals shall be decided by this common judgment and order.

5. The only common question that arises for decision on these appeals is, whether a divorcee daughter could be considered as a dependent of a deceased worker in terms of para 9.3.3 in Chapter IX of the NCWA-VI [a settlement within the meaning of section 2(p) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947] and thus entitled to be considered for compassionate appointment or monetary compensation, as the case may be, which is envisaged therein.

6. It is not disputed before us that the claims for compassionate appointment/monetary compensation to divorcee daughters of deceased workers arising for consideration are required to be decided on the terms of NCWA-VI as it is and, thus, the appellants would have to succeed on whatever the NCWA-VI provides and not beyond.

7. Chapter IX of the NCWA-VI titled “Social Security” envisages benefits that the employees covered thereby are entitled to. Inter alia, paras 9.3.0 and 9.4.0 and its various sub-paras contain provisions relating to employment or monetary compensation that could be given to a dependant of a worker who either dies while in service or who is permanently disabled rendering him unfit to continue service. Since we are not really concerned with a case where a worker due to permanent disability had to leave service, we need not look into para 9.4.0 in any great detail. However, para 9.3.0 being extremely relevant is required to be read in full and, accordingly, is set out hereunder:

“9.3.0. Provision of Employment to Dependants
9.3.1.	Employment would be provided to one dependant of workers who are disabled permanently and also those who die while in service. The provision will be implemented as