Anita Mahadelo vs South Eastern Coalfields Limited
2021 Latest Caselaw 1515 Chatt

                                       -1-


                                                                              NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                             WPS No. 3972 of 2021

     Anita Mahadelo W/o Suraj Mahadelo Aged About 35 Years R/o Village
     Amarkherwa, Ward No. 02, Manendragarh, District Koriya Chhattisgarh

                                                                    ---- Petitioner

                                     Versus

  1. South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through Chairman Cum Managing
     Director, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Head Quarter, Seepat Road,
     Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

  2. General Manager (Personnel/mp) South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Head
     Quarter, Seepat Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

  3. General Manager / Sub Area Manager Charcha Mine R.O, South Eastern
     Coalfields Limited, P.O. Manendragarh, District Koriya Chhattisgarh

  4. Deputy Manager (Personnel) Charcha Mine R O, South Eastern Coalfields
     Limited, P.O. - Manendragarh, District Koriya Chhattisgarh

                                                                ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. N. K. Shukla, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Arjit Tiwari, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board

02/08/2021

1. Aggrieved by the impugned order Annexure P-1 dated 08.04.2021 the

present writ petition has been filed.

2. Vide the impugned order the respondents have rejected the claim of the

petitioner for grant of dependent employment only on the ground that the

petitioner happens to be the married daughter.

3. Brief facts relevant for the disposal of the present writ petition is that the

mother of the petitioner Charki Bai working under the respondents died in

harness on 31.10.2017. The husband of the petitioner is unemployed. On

the date of death of deceased Charki Bai she was survived by one son

and two daughters, the other daughter of the petitioner had already

expired on 26.04.2018. Thereafter, it is the petitioner and one son who

survived the deceased Charki Bai. The son of the deceased i.e. the

brother of the present petitioner is a person who suffers from 80%

disability and thereby he is not in a position to seek employment under the

respondents.

4. Considering the said facts, the present petitioner the married daughter of

the deceased had filed the claim for dependent employment. According to

the petitioner she was totally dependent upon the income of the deceased

as the present petitioner's husband also was not in any employment and

petitioner in addition has the responsibility of a disabled brother also to

take care of.

5. As regards, the ground of rejection as would be evident from Annexure P-1

the same has been on the ground that a married daughter do not fall within

the ambit of dependents under the provisions of NCWA.

6. As regards the issue whether a married daughter would fall within the

ambit of dependent under the provisions of NCWA or not, the issue has

already been decided and settled by this Court in a couple of writ petitions,

the leading of which being the case of Asha Pandey Vs. Coal India

Limited & Others, in WPS 4994/2015 decided on 15.03.2016 and which

has been affirmed by the Division Bench as also by the Supreme Court.

The said judgment of the Asha Pandey (Supra) has further been followed

in a series of judgment thereafter, by this High Court whereby it has been

categorically held that even the married daughter would be eligible for

being considered for dependent employment under the provisions of

NCWA. The said decision has further been followed in other writ petitions

like WPS 9216/2019 decided on 11.12.2019 and many other cases of

similar nature.

7. Given the aforesaid legal position as it stands where the married daughter

has also been brought within the ambit of dependent under the provisions

of NCWA for dependent employment, the impugned order in the instant

case Annexure P-1 dated 08.04.2021 to that extent is therefore not

sustainable and the same therefore deserves to be and is accordingly set

aside/quashed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the

petitioner for dependent employment in terms of the provisions of the

NCWA subject to the petitioner fulfilling all other requisite eligibility criteria

except for the ground of being a married daughter.

8. Let an appropriate decision be taken at the earliest preferably within a

period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

9. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands allowed

and disposed of.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit