The Regional C.M.P.F ... vs Kalyani Devi
2023 Latest Caselaw 2555 Jhar

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                (Letters Patent Appellate Jurisdiction)

                           L.P.A No. 464 of 2019
The Regional C.M.P.F Commissioner, Zone-II, Dhanbad, PO-CMPF
Dhanbad, PS-Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad ......Respondent/ Appellant

                               Versus

1.Kalyani Devi, d/o late Chamtu Singh, w/o Puran Singh, r/o Dhaiya,
Thakurkuti, PO-Nagnagar Memko, PS-Dhanbad, District-Dhanbad
2. Pramila Kumari, d/o late Chamtu Singh, w/o Lalu Singh, r/o Barwadih,
PO-Nirsa, PS-Poddardati, District-Dhanbad          ......Petitioner/Respondents
3. Project Officer, Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Angarpathra Colliery under
Katras Area, PO +PS-Katrashgarh, District-Dhanbad
4. Bharat Coking Coal Limited, represented through Chairman-cum-
Managing Director, Koyla Bhawan, PO-Koyal Nagar, PS-Saraidhella,
District-Dhanbad            ...............Respondents/Performa Respondents
                                --------------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
           HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

For the Appellant           : Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the BCCL                : Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, Advocate
                              Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, Advocate
                               ---------------
                                                       ORDER

nd 2 August 2023

I.A No.7758 of 2022 This application has been filed for permission for ignoring defect no.15 pointed by the Registry and to withdraw the present Letters Patent Appeal.

2. Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the appellant apprises the Court that now since the provident fund amount of the deceased employee has been given to one of the sisters as per agreement between both the sisters, the present Letters Patent Appeal has been rendered infructuous.

3. On 6th July 2023, we have passed the following order:

" Though an application for withdrawal of the present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed in view of a compromise between the sisters one of whom was a married daughter of the deceased employee who filed an affidavit to the effect that she would not raise any objection if whole of the provident fund amount is given to her unmarried sister, we are inclined to examine validity of para 64 of Coal Mines Provident Fund Scheme in the context of right of

women to property under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 and, accordingly, we adjourn hearing of this matter for 2nd August 2023.

Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel appears for the BCCL which is a performa respondent.

We therefore direct that Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel shall assist this Court in this matter on the aforementioned point of law."

4. In course of hearing, it has transpired that there is a recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma" (2020) 9 SCC 1 holding that a daughter shall have coparcenary rights.

5. This has also been indicated by Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel who was directed to assist this Court that there is a possibility of dividing the provident fund amount of the deceased employee in equal shares to all the members of his family under section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 2006 as amended by Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.

6. However, considering the limited issue which was agitated before the writ Court, we are not inclined to delve into the aforesaid issues and leave it to the wisdom of the authority concerned.

7. I.A No.7758 of 2022 is allowed.

L.P.A No. 464 of 2019

8. Consequently, L.P.A No.464 of 2019 is dismissed as withdrawn.

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

sudhir