Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 960 (MP)

Rohidas v. Chief General Manager

2017-09-04

SANJAY YADAV

body2017
JUDGMENT : Sanjay Yadav, J. Grievance raised by the petitioner is against non-grant of employment to his son in terms of Clause-9.4.0 of the National Coal Wage Agreement VIII and IX, which makes the provision for employment to dependents. Clauses- 9.4.1 and 9.4.3 whereof provide for:- "9.4.1 Employment would be provided to one dependent of workers disabled permanently and those who meet with death while in service. The provision will be implemented as follows: 9.4.2 Employment of one dependent of the worker who dies while in service: (i) The dependent for this purpose means the wife/husband as the case may be, unmarried daughter, son and legally adopted son. If no such direct dependent is available for employment, younger brother, widowed daughter/widowed daughter-in-law or son-in-law residing with the deceased and almost wholly dependent on the earnings of the deceased may be considered to be the dependents of the deceased. (ii) The dependent to be considered for employment should be physically fit and suitable for employment and aged not more than 35 years provided that the age limit shall not apply in case of spouse. 9.4.3 Employment to one dependent of a worker who is permanently disabled in his place: (i) The disablement of the worker concerned should arise from injury or disease, be of a permanent nature resulting into loss of employment and it should be so certified by the Coal Company concerned. (ii) In case of disablement arising out of general physical disability so certified by Coal Company concerned, not arising out of injury or disease as in Para (i) above, the concerned employee will be eligible for the benefit under this Clause if the employee is upto the age of 58 years. (iii) The dependent for this purpose means the wife/husband as the case may be, unmarried daughter, son or legally adopted son. If no such direct dependent is available for employment, younger brother, widowed daughter/widowed daughter-in-law or son-in-law residing with the employee and almost wholly dependent on the earnings of the employees may be considered. (iv) The dependent to be considered for employment should be physically fit and suitable for employment and aged not more than 35 years provided that the age limit shall not apply in the case of spouse." 2. (iv) The dependent to be considered for employment should be physically fit and suitable for employment and aged not more than 35 years provided that the age limit shall not apply in the case of spouse." 2. The petitioner who was employed as Loader at Jamuna Kotma Area, South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. while in service had suffered impairment of motor power in left side upper and lower. He was medically examined by the Medical Board on 08.09.2015 whereon the Board opined that he can be given benefit of Clause-9.4.0. The petitioner however was not medically boarded out but retired on attaining the age of superannuation at the age of 60 years. After his retirement though it is contended on behalf of the petitioner that retiral dues have not been settled because of the controversy raised by the respondent that petitioner had obtained the job by playing fraud, by impersonating. The respondent however in a return filed on 04.10.2016 in paragraph-2 has categorically stated that the petitioner superannuated on 13.10.2015 and the answering respondents have paid handsome amount, besides that he is getting pension. These contentions are not denied by the petitioner, therefore, the contention made during course of hearing that the petitioner is deprived of his legitimate retiral dues, stand unsubstantiated. 3. As regard to appointment of the dependent son under Clause-9.4.0 of NCWA, true it is that the petitioner, in his medical, is adjudged that the benefit under Clause-9.4.0 can be given. However, it is not shown that the opinion of the Medical Board is binding. Had it been so the petitioner ought to have been boarded out on medical ground. The petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation. There is also no material on record to establish that the petitioner has ever approached the authorities for compassionate appointment invoking Clause-9.4.0. Though there has been some controversy regarding petitioner obtaining employment by impersonation, however, as per petitioner the enquiry caused by the Superintendent of Police, Anuppur, has turned in his favour. If that be so, the petitioner's son is always at liberty to apply for appointment by invoking Clause-9.4.0 and it is for the respondents to consider whether he is eligible. 4. Thus, the relief sought by the petitioner to direct the respondents to immediately grant employment though cannot be acceded to. If that be so, the petitioner's son is always at liberty to apply for appointment by invoking Clause-9.4.0 and it is for the respondents to consider whether he is eligible. 4. Thus, the relief sought by the petitioner to direct the respondents to immediately grant employment though cannot be acceded to. However, in case if petitioner's dependent son files an application, the respondents are directed to consider the same in accordance with law expeditiously. 5. The petition is finally disposed of in above terms. 6. No costs.