Back
2024 Supreme(Cal) 957
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, Tapabrata Chakraborty, JJ.
Steel Authority of India Ltd. & Ors. – Petitioner
Versus
Gayatri Mondal & Ors. – Respondents
WPCT 183 of 2024
Decided On : 06-08-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Lakshmi Gupta, Sr. Adv, Mr. L.K. Pal, Mr. N.C. Bhattacharyya, Mr. Sauvik Nandy.
For the Respondent: Mr. Saumya Majumder, Mr. Biswarup Biswas, Mr. Barun Chatterjee, Mr. P. Rej., Mr. Arabindo Sen, Mr. Partha Chakraborty.
IMPORTANT POINT
Compassionate employment claims should not be denied solely due to the absence of medical certification if the employee was suffering from a debilitating disease at the time of death.
Headnote:
Compassionate Employment - Death in Harness - Circulars 02/2012, 29/2012 - The court interpreted the provisions of the circulars regarding compassionate employment, emphasizing that death due to a debilitating disease without prior medical certification should not disqualify dependents from receiving benefits.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves a writ petition by Steel Authority of India challenging a tribunal's order regarding compassionate employment for the son of an employee who died from a debilitating disease before a scheduled medical examination.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the tribunal's direction to review the decision on compassionate employment was justified, as the employee's death should be considered under the compassionate employment scheme despite the lack of medical certification due to his untimely death.
Issues: Whether the death of an employee suffering from a debilitating disease should be classified as medical invalidation or natural death for the purpose of compassionate employment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the compassionate employment scheme must be interpreted in a manner that does not deny benefits to dependents due to circumstances beyond their control, such as the employee's death before medical examination.
Result: The writ petition is disposed of without interference in the tribunal's order to review the compassionate employment claim.
JUDGMENT :
Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.
1. The present writ petition has been preferred by Steel Authority of India (in short, SAIL) and its functionaries challenging an order dated 28.06.2023 passed by the learned Tribunal in the original application (hereinafter referred to as OA), being OA 865 of 2016.
2. The issue which arises for consideration is as to whether the death in harness of an employee of Durgapur Steel Plant (in short, DSP), a unit of SAIL, suffering from a debilitating disease, would be treated as death on medical invalidation or natural death in view of the provisions contained in the circulars being Sl. No. 02/2012 dated 31.01.2012 and Sl. No. 29/2012 dated 10.05.2012 before being certified as medically invalid by the competent medical board.
3. For adjudication of the lis, the following dates would be necessary:
| a) | July, 2011 | Dilip Kumar Mondal (in short, Dilip), met with an accident and was admitted at DSP main hospital; |
| b) | 16.8.2011 | Memo issued by the Director I/C (Medical and HS) DSP to the Clinical Director, Tata Memorial Hospital referring Dilip for admission in the said hospital; |
| c) | 31.01.2012 | Circular containing guidelines and procedure for dealing with compassionate cases; |
| d) | 24.04.2012 | Dilip submitted a representation for grant of compassionate employment to his son, namely, Chanchal Mondal (in short, Chanchal); |
| e) | 10.05.2012 | Circular detailing procedure for implementation of the guidelines; |
| f) | 16.05.2012 | Dilip submitted the proforma application as prescribed under the Scheme to avail compassionate benefit on the ground of medical invalidation; |
| g) | 15.06.2012 | Dilip expired; |
| h) | 16.06.2012 | Date fixed for examination before the Medical Disability cum Invalidation Board (in short, MDB); |
| i) | 28.07.2012 | Gayatri Mondal (in short, Gayatri), widow of Dilip submitted a representation for grant of compassionate employment to Chanchal on medical invalidation ground and death of Dilip; |
| j) | 23.12.2014 | Reminder submitted by Gayatri; |
| k) | 31.03.2015 | Date of normal retirement of Dilip; |
| l) | 8.06.2015 | Order passed by the learned Tribunal in OA 387 of 2015; |
| m) | 14.11.2015 | Order passed by the petitioner no.5 herein; |
| n) | 28.06.2023 | Order passed by the learned Tribunal in OA 865 of 2016 preferred by Gayatri and Chanchal challenging the order dated 14.11.2005 passed by the petitioner no.5. |
4. Mr. Gupta learned senior advocate appearing for SAIL and its functionaries, the petitioners herein submits that even after arriving at a specific finding that the petitioners were within their rights to deny compassionate employment to Chanchal, the learned Tribunal erred in law in directing the petitioners to review their decision dated 14.11.2015 and consider the employment of Chanchal on compassionate ground. The order impugned is thus self-contradictory and is unsustainable in law.
5. He would urge that the petitioners cannot be directed to act contrary to the circulars dated 31.01.2012 and 10.05.2012 (hereinafter referred to as the Scheme) laying down the provisions towards grant of employment on compassionate grounds. The Scheme which had been framed with good intent and purpose cannot be bypassed. The Scheme does not contemplate compassionate employment on medical invalidation ground of the concerned employee in the absence of certification by MDB that a debilitating disease was the cause of the employee’s death. Where the petitioners have acted bona fide and declined to appoint Chanchal, such exercise of authority cannot be interfered with. Shortly put, the petitioners cannot be directed in exercise of the authority of judicial review to do something which is beyond the Scheme and per se illegal. A result flowing from
