Calcutta High Court
Sumitra Bauri vs M/S Eastern Coal Fields Ltd And Ors on 29 July, 2025
Author: Aniruddha Roy
Bench: Aniruddha Roy
OD-2
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
WPO/1013/2024
SUMITRA BAURI
VS
M/S EASTERN COAL FIELDS LTD AND ORS.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA ROY
Date : 29th July, 2025.
Appearance:
Mr. Partha Ghosh, Adv.
Ms. Simran Sureka, Adv.
Mr. Debashis Das, Adv.
Mr. Bratin Suin, Adv.
...for the petitioner
Mr. Arup Kanti Poddar, Adv.
Ms. Anjali Shaw, Adv.
...for the respondent Nos.1 to 3/ECL
The Court :- Mr. Partha Ghosh, learned Advocate appears for the
petitioner. Mr. Anup Kanti Poddar, learned Advocate appears for ECL.
Mangla Bauri since deceased was an employee of ECL. Mangla died on
November 18, 1996. After the demise of Mangla his son Panna Bauri
applied for compassionate employment under the National Coal Wage
Agreement. By communication dated July 25, 2022 Annexure P-2 at page
29 to the writ petition the claim for compassionate employment was rejected.
Further Panna applied for compassionate employment, which was also
rejected by a communication dated November 7, 2011 Annexure P-4 at
page 31 to the writ petition on the medical ground. By communication dated
September 19, 2011 Annexure-5 at page 32 to the writ petition Panna
applied before the relevant Coal Company for re-examination by the Medical
Board. A medical certificate dated January 4, 2017 Annexure P-6 at page
33 to the writ petition issued by Medical Officer, Asansol District
Hospital shows that Panna was clinically fit then. Thereafter, a long silence
and ultimately on July 12, 2023 Annexure P-7 at page 35 to the writ
petition the writ petitioner being widow of the deceased employee applied for
monetary compensation with interest under the said Coal Wage Agreement
(MMCC).
Mr. Partha Ghosh, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that at
present the petitioner prays for monetary compensation and in the
alternative an employment for Panna and filed the instant writ petition on or
about October 3, 2024.
Mr. Partha Ghosh submits that the provisions under the Coal Wage
Agreement has been tested and travelled up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court
and then upheld. A larger Bench of this Court has also considered the
provisions and upheld. Following the larger Bench this Court has also
delivered its Judgment. Therefore, there is no impediment in allowing this
writ petition, at least directing to pay the monetary compensation.
At this juncture, Mr. Anup Kanti Poddar, learned Advocate appearing
for ECL submits that the facts in the instant case would show that since the
first rejection for compassionate employment in the year 2002, the petitioner
did not pursue her right for compensation until July 12, 2023 at page 35 to
the writ petition. Long 21 years have elapsed. He submits that due to this
inordinate and unexplained delay, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.
He further submits that the Coal Wage Agreement cannot be an open ended
provision, that even after an inordinate and unexplained delay, monetary
compensation shall be granted.
After considering the rival contentions of the parties, though it
appears from record that ECL has already filed a Report on Affidavit and
dealing with the same and Exception on Affidavit has already field by the
petitioner, still in view of the submission made on behalf of the ECL recorded
above, the respondents shall file an affidavit-in-opposition on or before
August 14, 2025. Affidavit-in-reply, if any, thereto shall be filed by August
21, 2025.
The writ petition shall appear under the heading "For Orders" on
August 26, 2025.
It is made clear that no further extension shall be granted to the
respondent. In the event no affidavit-in-opposition is filed as directed above,
the Court shall proceed on the basis of the report which is already on record.
Exception in the form of affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner is
taken on record.
The respondent shall also produce the original file relating to the
petitioner at the time of hearing of the writ petition.
Learned Advocate on Record for the petitioner shall communicate this
Order to the respondent to enable them to produce the record on the next
date.
(ANIRUDDHA ROY, J.)
S. A.
AR (CR)
