SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND - PRINCIPAL BENCH JHARKHAND
SANJU DEVI – Appellant
Versus
THE CENTRAL COALFIELDS LIMITED THROUGH ITS C M D – Respondent
WPC 4396/2018



Advocates:
['KRISHNA MURARI', '', 'RAJ VARDHAN', 'AMIT KUMAR DAS', '', 'DARSHANA PODDAR MISHRA', 'LAL CHANDRAHAS NATH SHAHEDEO', 'RAJIV SINHA', 'PREITY SINHA', 'SREENU GARAPATI']

(In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)

....

W.P. (S) No.4260 of 2018

....

Sabitri Devi

.… Petitioner

Versus

1. Union of India

2. Central Coalfields Limited

3. The Chief Managing Director, Central Coalfields Limited, Office at Darbhanga

House, P.O./P.S.-Ranchi, District-Ranchi

4. The General Manager, Central Coalfields Limited, Office at Charhi, P.O./P.S.-

Charhi, District-Hazaribagh.

5. The Project Officer, Central Coalfields Limited, office at Kedia UGP, P.O./P.S.-

Charhi, District-Hazaribagh.

6. The Staff Officer, Central Coalfields Limited, Hazaribagh Area, Charhi, P.O./P.S.-

Charhi, District-Hazaribagh

7. The Regional Commissioner, Region 2, Coal Mines Provident Fund, Mayfield

Building, Station Road, P.O./P.S.-Chutia, District-Ranchi

8. The Assistant Labour Commissioner, (Central), Hazaribag, P.O.-P.S./Dist.-

Hazaribag

9. Sanju Devi, daughter of Shri Chhedi Ram, resident of village Kaladwar, P.O.-

Ratanpur, P.S.-Ichak, District-Hazaribagh

.... Respondents

With

W.P. (S) No.4396 of 2018

Sanju Devi

.… Petitioner

Versus

1. The Central Coalfields Limited through its C.M.D., Darbhanga House, P.O. & P.S.-

Ranchi, Ditrict- Ranchi

2. The Project Officer, Kedla Underground Project at M/s C.C.L., P.O. & P.S.-Kedla,

District-Ramgarh

3. The Welfare Officer, Kedla Underground Project at M/s C.C.L., P.O. & P.S.-Kedla,

District-Ramgarh

4. The Personnel Officer, Kedla Underground Project at M/s C.C.L., P.O. & P.S.-

Kedla, District-Ramgarh

5. The Regional Commissioner, CMPF, Ranchi-II, P.O & P.S.-Ranchi, District-Ranchi

6. The Controlling Authority Under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and Assistant

Labour Commissioner (Central), Hazaribag, At-PO-PS-Dist-Hazaribag

.... Respondents

....

PRESENT

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

....

For the Petitioners

:Mrs. Rakhi Rani, Adv.(in W.P.S. No.4260/2018)

Mr. Krishna Murari, Adv.(in W.P.S. No.4396/2018)

For the Respondent-CCL

:Mrs. Darshana Poddar Mishra, AAG-I

(in W.P.S.No.4396/2018)

For the Respondent-CMPF

Mrs. Preity Sinha, Adv. .(in both cases)

For the Respondent Nos. 1 & 8

:Mr. Laxman Kumar, CGC

For the Respondent Nos. 2 to 6

:Mr. Vijay Kant Dubey, Adv.

For the Respondent No. 7

:Mr. Prashant Kr. Singh, Adv.

For the Respondent No. 9

:Mr. Krishna Murari, Adv. (in W.P.S. No.4260 /2018)

....

The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsels for the parties

had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondents.

2

Both the cases are being heard together because the issues in both cases

are inter-linked.

It is a family dispute between the parties. From perusal of records and

argument of the parties, following facts emerges-

Sabitri Devi is a widow, who has two sons, namely, Late Tulsi Das and

Jainandan @ Raju. The husband of Sabitri Devi had died-in-harness and on that

basis his one of the son, namely, Late Tulsi Das has been given compassionate

appointment in the year 1995. Unfortunately, Tulsi Das has also died on

17.12.2011 and on death of Tulsi Das, dispute has arisen between the parties, who

are parties in the present case. Sabitri Devi has claimed compassionate appointment

for her second son, namely, Jainandan @ Raju on the basis of nomination and

further she has claimed 100% amount of CMPF, Life Cover Scheme and Gratuity

on the basis that she was the only nominee to receive these amounts. So far as

pension is concerned, widow-Sabitri Devi wife of Late Tulsi Das is the nominee,

and as such no dispute has been raised. There was earlier litigation between the

parties and two writ petitions have also been filed. There

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top