Sujula Ankure @ Sujala Akuria vs M/S. Eastern Coal Fields Limited & ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 4968 Cal

    11                   IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
02.08.2022              CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
  sb
   Ct 23                        APPELLATE SIDE
                                 WPA 8828 of 2022

                            Sujula Ankure @ Sujala Akuria
                                         Vs.
                        M/s. Eastern Coal Fields Limited & Ors.

                         Mr. Partha Ghosh,
                         Mr. Amal Kumar Datta,
                         Mr. Debashis Das
                         Ms. Simran Sureka,
                         Ms. Ria Paul
                         Mr. Rahul Agarwala
                                     .... For the petitioner.

                         Mrs. Aparna Banerjee
                                    .... For the respondents.

The petitioner's husband, Abani Ankuria, while

working in Eastern Coalfields Limited (in short, ECL),

died-in-harness on 9th September, 1999. By an order

dated 16th December, 2021, passed by the Director

(Personnel), ECL, the petitioner's application for Monthly

Monetary Cash Compensation (in short, MMCC) was

allowed from 1st April, 2001, without any interest awarded

on the arrears. The petitioner has challenged the said

order dated 16th December, 2021 on three-fold grounds.

The first ground of petitioner's challenge is that MMCC

has to be granted from the date of death of the employee.

Secondly, interest should be given on the arrears. The

third ground is that the age of the petitioner was required

to be ascertained before passing the order. Since the

petitioner has been sanctioned MMCC till upto the age of

60 years as per National Coal Wage Agreement (in short,

NCWA) unless the age is ascertained at the present, in

future there is every likelihood of complication on ECL

saying that the petitioner had attained the age of 60 years

on a particular date which may be disputed by the

petitioner. There is also possibility, according to the

petitioner, that the age declaration given by the petitioner

in various documents may not be accepted by ECL.

On behalf of ECL, it is submitted that the petitioner

is entitled to receive MMCC from the date of her

application otherwise it does not stand to logic to pay

MMCC even if not applied for from a retrospective date.

ECL also says that at the time of death of the petitioner's

husband NCWA - VI was in operation. The same does not

provide for the date from which date the MMCC has to be

paid and, as such, taking the date of the petitioner's first

application for MMCC, the payment has been allowed from

1st April, 2001.

The date of payment of MMCC is no more res integra

in view of the judgments delivered by the Division Bench

and the Special Bench respectively reported in (2016) 3

WBLR (Cal) 464 (M/s. Eastern Coal Fields Limited &

Ors. Vs. Dewanti Kumari & Ors.), an unreported

judgment dated 28th August, 2008 passed in APOT 518 of

2007 (Smt. Chhaya Singh Sardar vs. Coal India Limited &

Ors.), another unreported judgment dated 8th March,

2013 passed in APOT 88 of 2013 (M/s. Eastern Coalfields

Limited & Ors. Vs. Bipini Marandi & Ors)., the judgment

dated 15th September, 2017 passed in FMA 4401 of 2016,

reported in 2018 (1) Cal. LT, 436 (Putul Rabidas vs.

Eastern Coalfields Limited & Ors.) and lastly by the

judgment dated 21st Aprilo, 2022 passed in MAT 86 of

2022 (M/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited & Ors. Vs. Smt.

Dukhni Bhuiya)

The MMCC is, therefor, required to be paid from the

date of death of the employee. In the instant case, the

same has to be paid from 9th September, 1999. It is also

admitted fact that the first application of the petitioner

was made on or about 9th March, 2001, the same

remained unprocessed till 16th December, 2021. The

petitioner, therefor, is entitled to interest on the arrears

amount as an by way of compensation since the petitioner

was deprived of the fruits of the money and at the same

time the money having remained with ECL, ECL has

derived benefit out of the same.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, ECL is

directed to pay MMCC to the petitioner from 9th

September, 1999 at the applicable rate till 31st March,

2001 along with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per

annum on such sum. The amount paid between 1st April,

2001 till the date of actual payment in terms of the order

dated 16th December, 2021 passed by the Director

(Personnel), shall also carry interest at the rate of 6 per

cent. ECL shall pay the principal arrears amount for the

period between 9th September, 1999 and 31st March, 2001

along with accrued interest and the interest on the arrears

for the principal sum paid from 1st April, 2001 till the date

of actual payment of such sum within a period of three

months from date.

The rate of interest allowed is fair and reasonable in

view of the ratio laid down in the judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in (2021) 11 SCC 543 (State of Andhra

Pradesh and Another vs. Dinavahi Lakshmi

Kameswari).

The issue as to ascertaining the petitioner's age is

also very important as NCWA - VI provides for payment

of MMCC to a female dependent upto the age of 60 years.

Unless the age of the petitioner is ascertained there

always remains a chance of dispute arising subsequently

encircling the age of the petitioner.

The petitioner and ECL are, therefor, directed to

approach the IPGME&R-SSKM Hospital, Kolkata, for

ascertaining the age of the petitioner. The Medical

Superintendent, IPGME&R-SSKM Hospital, Kolkata, on

being approached by either of the parties with a copy of

this order shall constitute a Board and conduct the

ossification test of the petitioner for the purpose of

ascertaining the age within a period of three months from

the date of being so approached. The report of the

medical examination, to be conducted on being

approached by either of the parties, shall be served on

the petitioner and ECL so that payment of MMCC can be

made by ECL till the age of 60 years as per the report.

The parties will, however, be free to take recourse to

challenge the findings of the medical examination of

IPGME&R-SSKM Hospital, Kolkata, if so advised.

The petitioner and ECL shall co-operate with the

authorities of IPGMER-SSKM Hospital, Kolkata, for the

purpose of ossification test of the petitioner.

Nothing further remains to be adjudicated in this

writ petition. The same is disposed of accordingly without

any order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if

applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of

necessary formalities.

(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)