Debmalya Ghosh vs Central Coalfields Limited
2024 Latest Caselaw 9869 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Debmalya Ghosh vs Central Coalfields Limited on 4 October, 2024

Author: Deepak Roshan

Bench: Deepak Roshan

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           W.P.(S) No. 984 of 2021
1. Debmalya Ghosh, aged about 56 years, only son of late Kshirode
Mohan Ghosh and permanent resident of 269 (Old-65), Ram Mohan
Sarani, PO-Baidyabati, District-Hooghly, PS-Sreerampur, West-Bengal,
PIN-712222
Email: [email protected] Ph:-+91 74393 25445 (Wh-App) and
Aadhaar-Linked, Compatible with Vidyo Platform VC-Link, Aadhaar
No.928504640726
2. Karabi Das, aged about 60 years, daughter of late Kshirode Mohan
Ghosh and wife of Sri Bimalendu Das and permanent resident of 28-A,
Bethune Row, PO-Beadon Street, PS-Bartolla, Kolkata-700006, West-
Bengal, [email protected] Ph:+91 9830226487 (Wh-App) and
Aadhaar-Linked, Aadhaar No. 3082 24880181           ... ... Petitioners

                                     Versus
Central Coalfields Limited, (A subsidiary of Coal India Limited), through
its Chairman cum Managing Director, having Head Office at Darbhanga
House, Kutchery Road, PS-Kotwali, PO-GPO, Ranchi 834001, Jharkhand,
Email. [email protected]                     ... ... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

For the Petitioners                      : In-person (Through V.C)
                                           Mr. Jay Prakash Pandey, Advocate
For the Respondent                       : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate
                                           Mr. Sankalp Goswami, Advocate
                                     --------
                               JUDGMENT

CAV on 10/07/2024 Pronounced on 04/10/2024

The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioners for the following reliefs:

"i. his arrear-dues of salary with respect to his increment of Rs.10/- per month to his monthly pay as detailed in his BNR-Appointment letter dated 19-07-1946 in point no 8 of Annexure 2 / page nos. 58, 59 (annexed later in paragraph 6), from 01-01-1947 to 31-05-1982, his retirement (skipping 3½ months maximum probation period from his date of joining i.e. 15-09-1946), and the aforesaid salary-arrear-dues are bona-fide and the employee is entitled to receive this as per the terms of his said appointment letter but the same was neither paid by the initial employer / Railways nor by the ultimate succeeding employer / Central Coalfields Limited (CCL) and which is clearly found to be un-paid in his Service-Book detailed in Annexure 5/ page nos. 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67 (annexed later in paragraph 9) and CCL is

statutorily bound to pay this salary-arrears including the portion of his prior salary-arrears payable by Railways/State- Collieries as per the Agreement (between Government of India and National Coal Development Corporation) detailed in Annexure 8/page nos. 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76 (annexed later in paragraph 12), with appropriate compound interest as fixed by your Lordship graciously granting equal justice as in similar cases, under extra-ordinary delay, ii. his totally un paid arrear dues of retirement benefits including Provident Fund, Pension, Gratuity and Family-Pension he is entitled to receive graciously considering him a permanent employee, with appropriate compound interest as fixed by your Lordship graciously granting equal justice as in similar cases, under extra ordinary delay."

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners claim that their father; late Kshirode Mohan Ghosh, was working as a Teacher in Raisina Bengali High School, New Delhi who subsequently joined his service in M.E. School, Talchar, Orissa which they claim to be owned by Bengal Nagpur Railway and was located in Deulbera Colliery which subsequently become part of Central Coalfields Limited and it has been stated that even his father was allotted a quarter by Central Coalfields Limited.

The father of the petitioners superannuated in the year, 1982; however, it is claimed that since then no retiral dues was paid and even while he was working, he was not given a monthly increment of Rs.10/- which has been claimed in the writ petition. The petitioners, however, admit in paragraph no. 15 of the writ application that UP/ME Schools (Upper/Primary/Middle and Elementary) were taken over by the Government of Orissa on and from 1st April, 1994. It has been stated that in such financial constraints, the father of the writ petitioners died on 08.11.1999.

3. The writ petitioners have further pleaded that previously they have moved the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No.27 of 2011, however, the Hon'ble Supreme Court permitted the petitioners to withdraw the writ application to approach the High Court (Annexure-28). Thereafter, the writ petitioners moved Calcutta High Court in W.P. No.16006(W) of 2011, however, same was also dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 15.11.2011 with a liberty to approach the jurisdictional High Court (Annexure-29).

It is then pleaded that the petitioners thereafter contacted one lawyer in Orissa who opined that as the petitioners do not have any landed property within the jurisdiction of Orissa High Court, writ would not be maintainable before the Orissa High Court and in support thereof, have brought on record a message claimed to have been sent by the said lawyer, namely, Dr. Madhumita Parida (Annexure-27). In such circumstances, as per the petitioners, they have approached the jurisdictional High Court at Jharkhand.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that no part of cause of action has accrued within the State of Jharkhand and, therefore, the writ application is not maintainable. The father of the petitioners admittedly retired from the school in Orissa and, therefore, no part of cause of action having arisen in Jharkhand; as such, the instant writ application on this count itself is liable to be dismissed.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the instant writ application suffers from delay and laches. Admittedly, the father of the petitioners was appointed in the School at Talchar (Orissa) on 19.07.1946 and he retired on 31.05.1982. The increments have been claimed for the period 01.01.1947 to 31.05.1982. The father of the petitioners did not in his entire lifetime ever claim the same and, therefore, the writ application for the dues for the period 01.01.1947 to 31.05.1982 could not have been filed by the petitioners in the year, 2021 i.e. after more than 39 years of retirement of their father.

Further, the entire claim is ill-founded, inasmuch as, the service book of late Kshirode Mohan Ghosh has been brought on record as Annexure-5 to this writ application which appears to have been issued by the School Management and does not bear any signature of any authority of Central Coalfields Limited. Further, from bare perusal of Annexure-24, which is a Pension Payment Order, it would transpire that the pension was fixed and paid by the State of Orissa. In such circumstances, the claim of the writ petitioners of retiral dues from Central Coalfields Limited, on the

face of it, is wholly ill-founded.

6. After going through the record it appears that opportunity was given by this Court to the writ petitioners to show as to how the petitioners claim themselves that their father was employee of CCL; however, the supplementary affidavit which was filed by the petitioners on 08.04.2024 does not contain any document to establish such fact as the petitioners by the said supplementary affidavit have tried to bring on record Census of India for the year 1981, certain extracts of the meeting of Board of Directors of MCL dated 29.08.2020, which are wholly irrelevant for the issues.

It further transpires that Central Coalfields Limited has filed counter affidavit and strongly denied that the petitioners' father was at any point of time employed under the said Company; rather it has specifically stated that the school at the time of appointment of the father of the petitioners might have been a privately managed school and at no point of time, the school was owned or managed by Central Coalfields Limited. The Central Coalfields Limited has further filed an affidavit in compliance of the order dated 08.12.2023 passed by this Court wherein they have brought on record certain documents which they received from the petitioners including the documents showing calculation of pension under the Orissa Aided Educational Institutions Employees' Retirement Benefits Rules, 1981 and the institution was aided by the Government of Orissa and pension was received by the father of the petitioners from Government of Orissa.

7. Having regards to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the instant writ application before this Court appears to be wholly misconceived for the following reasons:

(i) Firstly, this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate the claim of the petitioners as no cause of action has accrued within territorial jurisdiction of this Court.

(ii) Secondly, the writ application is liable to be dismissed on the

ground of delay and laches, inasmuch as, the ex-employee never in his lifetime raised any claim or grievance with respect to denial of any increment or non-payment of any part of retiral dues; rather after more than 21 years of the death of the ex-employee, the writ application has been filed before this Court and the explanation of territorial jurisdiction is wholly misconceived.

(iii) The contention of the petitioners that some lawyer had given an opinion that a writ application would not be maintainable at Orissa cannot be a basis of maintaining a writ application in Jharkhand.

8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the instant writ application is thus dismissed, however, there is no order as to cost.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated: 04 /10/2024 Amit

AFR/NAFR