Chattisgarh High Court
Preety Nillay Matreja vs Coal India Limited on 10 September, 2021
-1-
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 4819 of 2021
Preety Nillay Matreja W/o Ankit Matreja, D/o Late Ajay Kumar Aged About
29 Years Resident Of Quarter No. C.H/32, Shahid Bhagat Singh Colony,
SECL Korba , Post And District Korba Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Coal India Limited Through Its Chairman 10 Netaji Subhash Road
Calcutta (West Bengal), District : Kolkata, West Bengal
2. South Eastern Coalfields Limited Chairman Cum Managing Director ,
Seepat Road, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
3. Senior Manager (Personnel) South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Central
Workshop SECL Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba,
Chhattisgarh
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate.
For Respondent/s : Mr. Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order on Board
10/09/2021
1. Aggrieved by the order Annexure P-1 dated 08.07.2021 the present writ
petition has been filed.
2. Vide the said order the respondents have rejected the claim of the
petitioner for compassionate appointment. The father of the petitioner was
working under the respondents and who died in harness on 29.03.2021.
On the date of death, the deceased was survived by his widow and two
daughters and petitioner being one of them, the petitioner moved an
application for dependent employment which vide impugned order stands
rejected. The sole ground of rejection was the status of the petitioner
being that of a married daughter. Therefore they would not fall within the
ambit of dependents under the provisions of NCWA Chapter- IX.
3. So far as the issue whether a married daughter would fall within the ambit
of dependent of the deceased under the provisions of NCWA Chapter-IX,
the law as of now stands settled and it is no longer res-integra. This High
Court in the case of Smt. Asha Pandey Vs. Coal India Ltd. & Others,
passed in WPS 4994/2015 decided on 15.03.2016 has already held that
a married daughter also would be fall within the ambit of a dependent and
rejection of candidature of a married daughter for dependent employment
only on the ground of her marital status is bad in law. The said order of
this Court in the case of Smt. Asha Pandey Vs. Coal India Ltd. &
Others, have been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court and also by
Hon'ble Supreme Court.
4. The said judgment of the Single Bench dated 15.3.2016 was subjected to
challenge in an appeal i.e. Writ Appeal No.246 of 2016 along with couple
of other Writ Appeals preferred by the respondent management. The said
bunch of Writ Appeals got dismissed by the Division Bench vide order
dated 3.9.2019. The Division Bench while dismissing the Writ Appeals, in
paragraph 18, held as under:
"18. It is made clear that the writ Court after holding part of
Clause9.3.3 of NCWA -VI and Clause 9.4.0 (1) of NCWA -
IX to be void and inoperative to the extent it excludes
married daughter from consideration for dependent
employment, directed appellant company to consider the
claim of petitioners therein for dependent employment
afresh, in accordance with law. Said direction of the writ
Court is only with regard to consideration of claim for
dependent employment and to grant the same subject to
fulfillment of other requirements of becoming entitled for
dependent employment as prescribed in Clause 9.3.3 of
NCWA- IX."
5. In view of the aforesaid decisions laid down by the Single Bench as well
as by the Division Bench, this Court in the present Writ Petition is of the
firm view that the factual matrix of the present case and the contentions
put forth by the management in support of their contentions being the
same that have been raised and decided in the aforementioned Writ
Petition as well as Writ Appeals, the present Writ Petition also deserves to
be allowed in similar terms.
6. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition also stands allowed in terms of the
order passed by the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No.246 of 2016 and
other Writ Appeals decided analogously on 3.9.2019.
7. As a result, the impugned order dated 08.07.2021 Annexure P-1 passed
in the case of petitioner deserves to be and is accordingly set aside and
matter stands remitted back to the respondent authorities for taking a
fresh consideration on the claim of the petitioner for dependent
employment. The same shall be considered and decided by the
respondents after due verification of the entitlement part of the petitioner
in accordance with the policy governing the field at the earliest preferably
within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order
subject to the petitioner being otherwise eligible for all the grounds other
than her marital status.
8. Let this exercise be completed within a period of ninety days from the date
of receipt of copy of this order.
9. Writ Petition stands allowed and is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy)
Judge
Rohit
