Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
B.R. Sarangi, J.
Basanti Sa - Appellant
Versus
Mahanadi Coalfields Limited & Ors. - Respondents
W. P. (C) No. 14298 of 2014
Decided On : 10-08-2021
Compassionate Appointment - National Coal Wages Agreement-IX - 9.3.0, 9.3.1, 9.3.2, 9.4.3, 9.5.0 - The court quashed the rejection of the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment and directed the opposite party to provide compassionate appointment to one of the sons of the petitioner within two months. The court also ordered a lump sum amount of Rs.1,00,000 to be paid to the petitioner for the period of harassment from the date of her husband's death till the date of the judgment.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, wife of deceased-Suresh Sa, sought to quash the rejection of her claim for dependant employment under the National Coal Wages Agreement-IX (NCWA-IX) after her husband's death. The petitioner's husband was an employee of Mahanadi Coalfields Limited and died in a road accident while in service. The petitioner applied for compassionate appointment and faced delays and rejections from the opposite parties.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's husband was an employee of Mahanadi Coalfields Limited and had served from 01.01.1986 till his death on 20.01.2007. The court noted that the petitioner had been paid gratuity and pension as the legal representative of the deceased employee. The court also found that the reasons for rejecting the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment were violative of the principle of natural justice.
Issues: The issues included the delay and rejection of the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment, the allegations against the deceased employee's entry into service, and the application of the National Coal Wages Agreement-IX (NCWA-IX) provisions for compassionate appointment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner, as the wife of the deceased employee, was entitled to compassionate appointment under the NCWA-IX. The court also emphasized the need for timely and justifiable consideration of compassionate appointment claims and the importance of providing relief to the family of a deceased employee.
Final Decision: The court quashed the rejection of the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment and directed the opposite party to provide compassionate appointment to one of the sons of the petitioner within two months. The court also ordered a lump sum amount of Rs.1,00,000 to be paid to the petitioner for the period of harassment from the date of her husband's death till the date of the judgment.
JUDGMENT
Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J. - The petitioner, being the wife of deceased-Suresh Sa, who was an employee of Mahanadi Coalfields Limited, has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the letter dated 30.05.2014 under Annexure-12 issued by opposite party no.3 rejecting her claim of dependant employment as per clause-9.3.0 of the National Coal Wages Agreement-IX (NCWA-IX).
2. The factual matrix of the case, in brief, is that the petitioner's husband, Suresh Sa was appointed as Driver (T) on 01.01.1986 in the Belpahar Open Cast Mines of Mahanadi Coalfields Limited (MCL). Subsequently, he was promoted to category-II and confirmed in category-I on 01.01.1987. Thereafter, he was posted in IB Vally Area and continued as such till he was posed at Lakhanpur area as Dumper Operator. He was sent for refresher course of Training Institute, IB Vally, Mahanadi Coalfields Limited during October, 1999. While continuing in service at Lakhanpur Open Cast Project, he died in a road accident on 20.01.2007, at the time of returning home, leaving behind his widow Basanti Sa (petitioner), one daughter and two sons. The petitioner, upon death of her husband, on 12.03.2007 applied for the death benefit of her Late husband enclosing all documents which were not provided.
Subsequently, on 25.09.2008, she applied for compassionate appointment until her sons get appointment as dependant. She also submitted similar letter, along with all the necessary documents, which was received by Lakhanpur O.C.P. on 03.10.2008. The petitioner, along with the application in the prescribed form, submitted legal heir certificate, Family Praman Patra, Character Certificate, No Objection of family members, five photographs, besides her voter identity card. Though the application was complete in all respect, there was no response from the opposite parties. Consequently, on 16.11.2010, she made a representation to the Sr. Personal Manager, and also further representations to the Chief Vigilance Officer (CVO) on 09.05.2011 and 21.07.2011 claiming CMPF, pension under CMPS 98, Leave Encashment, Compassionate appointment under clause-9.4.3 of NCWA-IX, but no action was taken. Again on 29.09.2011, she made a fresh application to the Sr. Manager, Personnel of MCL.
2.1 The petitioner, after waiting for six years from the date of death of her husband for compassionate appointment, as a dependant, received a letter on 18.08.2012 from the Chief Manager (Personnel), Lakhanpur Area wherein the petitioner was advised to attend an enquiry on 24.08.2012 with regard to her claim of compassionate appointment. The petitioner attended the enquiry on the date fixed, but she did not receive any communication with regard to its outcome.
The petitioner requested for release of terminal benefits like gratuity and other benefits, as due and admissible to the deceased employee. In response to same, gratuity was released after four years of the death of her husband and she was also allowed to receive a meager pension of Rs.1800/- per month, and she was under threat of eviction from the quarter allotted to her husband.
2.2 In spite of several requests, when the petitioner was not provided compassionate appointment, she approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.14541 of 2013 seeking compassionate appointment under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme as per NCWA-IX. This Court, vide order dated 05.08.2013, disposed of the said writ petition directing the Chief Manager (Personnel), MCL, Lakhanpur Area to look into the grievance of the petitioner and consider the same in accordance with the prevailing rules and take a decision thereon within a period of thirty days from the date of production of certified copy of the order. The said order was duly communicated to the Chief Manager (Personnel), MCL, Lakhanpur Area, pursuant to which, the petitioner was communicated, vide letter dated 23.09.2013, that her case was processed for taking a decision as per prevailing rules for appointment on compassionate grounds. On 2
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
