Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 261 (CAL)

Tilasari (Devi) Dusad v. Coal India Ltd.

2010-03-11

ANIRUDDHA BOSE

body2010
JUDGMENT 1. THE petitioner is the widow of an erstwhile employee of Eastern Coalfields Limited (the company). The husband of the petitioner died natural death while in service of the company on 5th March, 1994. The petitioner has been given certain sum of money as compensation on the death of her husband, but her claim is that such sum is inadequate. 2. THE common practice for different public sector and some private sector coal companies, so far as defining the benefits relating to service of their employees is concerned, is to enter into agreement with different Trade Unions operating in the coal mine sector, and these agreements are known as ''National Coal Wage Agreements" (NCWA). Usually, these agreements last for a period of about five years. When the husband of the petitioner died, it was NCWA-V which was in operation. NCWA-V postulates compensation of Rs. 2,000/- per month to the widow of a coal mine worker if such worker dies a natural death while in service. A higher sum is stipulated as compensation if such workman dies in a mine accident, but that is not relevant for the purpose of adjudication of the present writ petition. Ncwa-V lapsed on 30th June, 1996. So far as entitlement of the petitioner of Rs. 2,000/- per month under. Ncwa-V is concerned, there is no dispute in that regard in the present proceeding. The dispute in this writ petition is over entitlement of the petitioner in Ncwa-VI. Ncwa-VI was signed on 23rd December, 2000, but the effective date of such agreement having become operational was 1st July, 1996. Compensation to the widows similar to that of the petitioner was enhanced by Rs. 1,000/- in Ncwa-VI. Thus, the petitioner became entitled to receive Rs. 3,000/- under the Ncwa-VI. The question, however, arises as to what would be the date, from which the petitioner would be entitled to receive the enhanced amount. The provision, relating to compensation in Ncwa-VI is contained in clause- 9.5.0. of this agreement. This clause provides: "9.5.0.-Employment/monetary compensation to female dependant-Provision of employment/monetary compensation to female dependants of workmen who die while in service and who are declared medically unfit as per clause 9.4.0. above would be regulated as under : i) In case of death due to mine accident, the female dependant would have the option to either accept the monetary compensation of Rs. above would be regulated as under : i) In case of death due to mine accident, the female dependant would have the option to either accept the monetary compensation of Rs. 4,000/- per month or employment irrespective of he age. ii) In case of death/total permanent disablement due to causes other than mine accident and medical unfitness under clause 9.4.O., if the female dependant is below the age of 45 years she will have the option either to accept the monetary compensation of Rs. 3,000/- per month or employment. In case the female dependant is above 45 years of age she will be entitled only to monetary compensation and not to employment. iii) "In case of death either in mine accident or for other reasons or medical unfitness under clause 9.4.0., if no employment has been offered and the male dependant of the concerned worker is 12 years and above in age, he will be kept on a live roster and would be provided employment commensurate with his skill and qualifications when he attains the age of 18 years. During the period the male dependant is on live roster, the female dependant will be paid monetary compensation as per rates at paras (i) and (ii) above. This will be effective from 1.1.2000. iv) Monetary compensation. wherever applicable ,would be paid till the female dependant attains the age of 60 years. v) The existing rate of monetary compensation will Continue. The matter will be further discussed in the Standardisation Committee and finalised. Note : In the case of TISCO, the matter would be settled at bipartite level." 3. SUBMISSION of Mr. Ghose, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, is that the petitioner would be entitled to compensation at the enhanced rate of Rs.3,000/- per month with effect from 1st July, 1996 being the date on which this agreement became operational. 4. MR. Basu Chowdhury, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, on the other hand, contends that the writ petitioner shall be entitled to the enhanced sum only from 1st January, 2000 in view of the special provision contained in sub-clause (iii) of the said clause. His case is that the said agreement envisages two classes of female dependants of a deceased workman, being the female dependant of a workman who dies in a mining accident and the female dependant of a workman in service who dies a natural death. 5. His case is that the said agreement envisages two classes of female dependants of a deceased workman, being the female dependant of a workman who dies in a mining accident and the female dependant of a workman in service who dies a natural death. 5. RELYING on an unreported judgment of this Court in W.P.No.3715(W) of 2009, Sourish Ganguly vs. Coal India Ltd. and Ors., delivered on 19th November, 2009, he submits that the provision relating to enhanced benefit for the petitioner would be operable from 1st January, 2000 only. He has further argued that in the event the enhanced compensation to the petitioner and other persons similarly situated is accorded from the date the agreement became: operational, that would create inequality between two sets of similarly steated persons. He submitted that in the absence of any statutory sanction, construction of the agreement which would result in creation of inequality between two sets of similarly situated persons is impermissible. In support of this proposition of law, he relied on a decision of this Court in the case of T.P. Mukherjee vs. G. C. Mondal, 70 CWN 652. The inequality, according to him, would be between the female dependants who await service of a male dependant and those who do not have any male dependant on a live roster. 6. HE has also raised the point of alternative remedy referring to clause 13.3.0. of the said agreement, which provides: "13.3.0. The Management of the coal companies on their part will not resort to unilateral interpretations of the agreement in case of any doubt or difficulty in interpretation or implementation of any clause of this agreement, the same shall be referred to and settled by the JBCCI or a sub-committee constituted by the JBCCI for the purpose in the spirit of mutual goodwill." I shall first deal with the question of maintainability of the writ petition on the ground of there being efficacious alternative remedy. This writ petition was moved on 14th September, 2009 on which date directions for affidavit were given. Affidavit-in-opposition and reply have also been filed. The matter relates to interpretation of certain clause of an agreement and no factual issue is required to be determined for effective adjudication of this writ petition. This writ petition was moved on 14th September, 2009 on which date directions for affidavit were given. Affidavit-in-opposition and reply have also been filed. The matter relates to interpretation of certain clause of an agreement and no factual issue is required to be determined for effective adjudication of this writ petition. In my view, after directions for affidavit are given and this Court enters into the dispute for examining the issues on merit, it would not be proper to send the petitioner to another forum at that stage, particularly since the present proceeding does not require adjudication on any factual issue. That would cause undue hardship to the petitioner which the Writ Court always seeks to avoid. The preliminary objection on the ground of maintainability of the writ petition on this ground is, accordingly, rejected. 7. NOW comes the question of interpretation of the clause 13.3.1. Mr. Basu Chowdhury drew my attention to the said clause which stipulates that the same shall come into force and will be implemented with effect from 1st July, 1996 unless otherwise specified. According to him, enhancement of the said sum has been otherwise specified to have become effective from 1st January, 2000 under the said clause. I am unable to accept this argument. On a plain reading of this clause, I find that no date has been specifically provided for coming into operation of clauses (i) and (ii). Only sub-clause (iii) has been given subsequent operational date. Interpretation of this clause was subject-matter of a writ petition, being W.P. No. 3715(W) of 2009. In that case, question arose as to what would be the minimum age of a male dependant of a deceased employee at the time of death of a deceased employee to entitle him to claim appointment from the death in harness category. It was in that context this Court held that the effective date specified in sub-clause (iii) of clause 9.5.0. would be in relation to entitlement of financial compensation of female dependant of a deceased workman when the name of a young male dependent is kept on a live roster. So far as minimum age specified in the said clause, it was held that the stipulation relating to minimum age would operate from the date on which the agreement becomes operational. This judgment, thus, does not aid the respondents' case in any way. So far as minimum age specified in the said clause, it was held that the stipulation relating to minimum age would operate from the date on which the agreement becomes operational. This judgment, thus, does not aid the respondents' case in any way. So far as sub-clauses (i) and (ii) of clause 9.5.0. of NCWA-VI are concerned, I do not find the agreement postulates any date different from the one on which the agreement becomes operational for their implementation. 8. THE argument based on inequality between two classes of similarly situated persons, in my opinion, is also unacceptable. There is difference between the two classes and categories of persons contemplated in sub clause (ii) and sub-clause (iii). Sub-clause (iii) of the agreement postulates compensation for the female dependant of a deceased workman whose son is of 12 years or above in age at the time of his death. Till he attains the age of 18 years, the female dependant has been conferred with this special benefit for monetary compensation. The whole object of this kind of compensation package is to assist the family of a deceased workman in meeting the crisis originating from sudden death of the earning member of the family. So far as cases of female dependants in sub-clause (iii) are concerned, they stand on a footing different from the female dependants specified in sub-clauses (i) and (ii). Sub-clause (i) relates to the female dependants of a workman dying in a mine accident, A comparatively better compensation package is contemplated in such a case. Sub-clause (ii) relate to cases of death of a workman while serving the company. In sub-clause (ii) however the beneficiaries are female dependants and if the age of such dependants is below 45 years, they have been given the option of accepting either employment or monthly compensation package while the female dependants above 45 years become entitled to monetary compensation package only. In their cases, there is no possibility of their sons getting employment with the concerned coal companies. 9. IT is well within the power or jurisdiction or authority of any legislative or administrative body to make reasonable classification between or among classes of persons differently situated. In my opinion this is what has been done in the present case. 10. In their cases, there is no possibility of their sons getting employment with the concerned coal companies. 9. IT is well within the power or jurisdiction or authority of any legislative or administrative body to make reasonable classification between or among classes of persons differently situated. In my opinion this is what has been done in the present case. 10. THE agreement does not specify any date subsequent to the date on which the same become operational for conferring benefit to the writ petitioner, whose case is covered under clause 9.5.0. (ii) of the agreement. In view of the same, the petitioner should get the benefit from the date the NCWA-VI became operational. Under the circumstances, I direct the respondents to calculate the dues of the petitioner on the basis of her entitlement to receive the enhanced amount i.e. Rs. 3,000/- from 1.7.96 upon making adjustment vis-a-vis the sum of money already paid. I direct the respondents to pay the said sum after calculation within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order. The writ petition stands allowed in the above terms. There shall however be no order as to costs. All parties are to act on a photo-stat signed copy of this order on the usual undertakings.