Jharkhand High Court
Poulina Tudu vs The State Of Jharkhand on 5 February, 2024
Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 1182 of 2023
Poulina Tudu, aged about 43 years, wife of Late Shaid Marandi, resident of
Bora Pachgarh Dhata Tola, P.O. Sahibganj, P.S. Borio (Jharkhand), District
Sahibganj ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj, P.O. & P.S. Sahibganj, District
Sahibganj
3. District Welfare Officer, Vikash Bhawan, Sahibganj, P.O. Borio, P.S. Borio,
District Sahibganj
4. Santri Hansda wife of Late Artemas Marandi @ Tala Marandi, resident of
Village + P.O. Govindpur, P.S. Ramgarh, District Dumka
... ... Respondents
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. P. K. Mukhopadhyay, Advocate
For the Resp.-State : Mr. Vishnu Prabhakar Pathak, Advocate
---
th
06/5 February 2024
1. Learned counsel for the parties are present.
2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs: -
"for issuance of appropriate writ(s), Order(s), Direction(s) in the
nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents particularly
the respondent no. 2, the Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj to provide
compassionate employment to the petitioner on the ground that her
husband Shaid Marandi died in harness on 30.04.2007 while working
as a Night-guard in District Welfare Department, Sahibganj and
Death-Cum-Retiral Gratuity (DCRG) benefits & pension etc. and also
in compliance of order dated 19.08.2013 passed by this Hon'ble Court
in W.P. (S) No. 2378 of 2009 and also in view of the order direction(s)
passed by the respondent no. 2 vide order dated 23.02.2021 in Mis.
Case No. 02 of 2018-19;
And/Or
For issuance of any other appropriate Writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) as
this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and
circumstances of this case for doing conscionable justice to the
petitioner."
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that earlier one writ
petition being W.P. (S) No. 2378 of 2009 was filed by Artemas Marandi, the
son of the deceased employee which was disposed of by this Court vide order
dated 19.08.2013 with a direction upon the concerned authority to decide the
matter for grant of compassionate appointment and other benefits in
accordance with law.
4. The learned counsel submits that there was a title suit between the
petitioner and her step son, namely, Artemas Marandi which was decided
against the petitioner and ultimately the judgment was passed in favour of the
petitioner in Appeal No. 15 of 2011 vide judgment dated 17.07.2011 wherein
the petitioner and said Artemas Marandi were declared to be the legal heirs and
successors of the deceased employee, namely, Shaid Marandi. The learned
counsel submits that despite such fact the death-cum-retiral benefits have not
been paid to the petitioner and therefore the present writ petition has been filed.
5. The learned counsel for the respondents while referring to Annexure-4 to
the writ petition has submitted that a reasoned order has been passed wherein
the claim of compassionate appointment to the petitioner has been rejected by
stating that she was already working as Sewika. So far as the claim of death-
cum-retiral benefits is concerned, it appears from the said order that the
petitioner and her step son were found to be equally entitled. Now the step son
has died. The learned counsel submits that this aspect of the matter can be
taken care of by the Deputy Commissioner who has passed the order as
contained in Annexure-4.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts
and circumstances of this case and going through the order as contained in
Annexure-4 in Misc. Case No. 02 of 2018-19 dated 23.02.2021, it has been
recorded that the petitioner is working as Aanganbari Sewika. Considering this
aspect of the matter, this court is not inclined to grant relief regarding grant
compassionate appointment to the petitioner.
7. So far as death-cum-retiral benefits are concerned, as per the aforesaid
order dated 23.02.2021 itself the petitioner and also the wife of late step son of
the petitioner were jointly held to be entitled to the benefits of death-cum-
retiral benefits. However, no payment has been made to the petitioner.
8. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of enabling the petitioner to
approach respondent No. 2 by filing a representation for grant of death-cum-
retiral benefits along with a copy of this order and a copy of the writ records
within a period of 15 days from today.
9. Upon filing of such representation, the respondent No. 2 shall pass an
appropriate order as per law after granting an opportunity of hearing to the
petitioner as well as respondent No. 4 who is the wife of the deceased step son
of the petitioner. The needful be done within a period of two months from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order. The reasoned order be communicated to
the parties through speed-post.
10. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid
observations and directions.
11. Pending I.A., if any, is closed.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Mukul
