Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 579 (JHR)

Momina Khatun v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.

2008-06-11

AMARESHWAR SAHAY

body2008
Order Heard the parties. 2. In view of the facts stated in the interlocutory application and the grounds taken therein, this interlocutory application is allowed and the amendment as sought for is hereby allowed. 3. Let this interlocutory application be treated as a part of the main writ application. W.P.S, No. 2557 of 2007 4. W4th the consent of the parties this writ application has been heard on its merit and is being disposed of at this stage itself. 5. The writ petitioner is the widow of the deceased employee of B.C.C.L., who died-in-harness on 21.5.2000. The petitioner applied for appointment of her son namely Bablu Sheikh on compassionate ground under the provision of 9.3.2 of the National Coal Wages Agreement-VI on 22.6.2000. The prayer for compassionate appointment of the son of the petitioner has been rejected by the authorities of the B.C.C.L. by issue of an order dated 6/7.1.07 as contained in Annexure-11 to the interlocutory application, which has been treated as a part of the main writ application. The order as contained in Annexure11 reads as under:- "No. BCCUPA-VI/Misc/01/5477 Dt. 6/7.1.07 To, The Dy. CP.M. Kustore Area Sub.:-Employment to Sri Bablu Seikh S/o Late Mustakim Mia, Ex-Pump Operator Ena Colliery/Project. Dear Sir, The above reference employment case file was placed before the Fds wherein the employment claim of Sri Bablu Seikh said to be son of Late Mustakim Mia has been regretted. This is for information and necessary action please. Yours faithfully, Sd/(L.N. Mishra) Personnel Manager (MP&R)" 6. From bare perusal of the aforesaid letter, quoted herein above, it is apparent that no reason whatsoever has been assigned in the said order for rejecting the claim of the petitioner for appointment of her son on compassionate ground. This order clearly a non-speaking order. 7. However, in the counter affidavit, the authorities of the B.C.C.L. have tried to explain the reasons for rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for appointment of her son on compassionate ground. It is stated that the husband of the petitioner. i.e. the employee of the B.C.C.L., should have superannuated in the year 1994 itself but he wrongly continued in service up to the year 2000 and, therefore, the claim for appointment of the petitioner's son on compassionate ground cannot be allowed. It is not the case of the petitioner that husband of the petitioner continued in service for any misrepresentation on his part. It is not the case of the petitioner that husband of the petitioner continued in service for any misrepresentation on his part. The fact remains that the husband of the petitioner continued in service up to the year 2000 and while in service he died-in-harness in the year 2000. Therefore, in my view, the ground stated in the counter affidavit for rejecting the claim of the petitioner for appointment of her son on compassionate ground, cannot be accepted and hence is rejected. 8. Since the husband of the petitioner died-in-harness and, therefore, the claim for appointment on compassionate ground was maintainable. 9. Accordingly, this writ application is allowed. The order dated 6/7.1.07 as contained in Annexure-11 to the interlocutory application, is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Project Officer, Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Ena Colliery, P.O., Bhuggatdih, P.S. Jharia, Dhanbad (Respondent NO.5) for fresh consideration of the claim of the petitioner for appointment of her son on compassionate ground on its merit in accordance with law as per the provision of 9.3.2 of the National Coal Wages Agreement-VI. The Project Officer shall pass a final order within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.