Rukhia Devi vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited & ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 671 Jhar

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             Civil Review No. 12 of 2019
     Rukhia Devi                                              --- --- Petitioner
                              Versus
     Bharat Coking Coal Limited & others               --- --- Opposite Parties

                                       With

                              Civil Review No. 10 of 2019
     Rajia Devi & others                                        --- --- Petitioners
                              Versus
     Bharat Coking Coal Limited & others                   --- --- Opposite Parties
                                   .......

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

Through Video Conferencing For the Petitioners : M/s Ajit Kumar, Sr. Adv., Amarendra Pradhan, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate

08/11.02.2021 Learned Senior Counsel for the review petitioners submits that there may be few more review petitions directed against the impugned judgment. According to the petitioners, the application of review petitioners had been filed before the cut of date fixed under the Coal India Special Female Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2015. However, several applicants similarly placed as these petitioners who had also filed application before the cut of date could get appointment under the scheme while the applications of petitioners were kept pending.

Apart from the above contentions on facts, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that L.P.A. No. 340 of 2016 was disposed of by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court holding that there was no substance in the L.P.A. and that no error had been committed by the learned Single Judge while passing the order dated 30.06.2016. The scheme was per se not declared to be unconstitutional, rather it was the respondent Coal India Limited, who had brought to the court's notice that the scheme of 2015 lived a short life of 6 months only and the same has been acted upon also.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that he would also seek instructions as to whether there are any more review petition preferred against the impugned judgment passed in batch of writ petition led by W.P.(S) No. 1622 of 2017.

Accordingly, as prayed for by learned counsel for the parties, matter is adjourned for two weeks. List them thereafter.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

A.Mohanty