Quashed

Nanki Bai v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Chhattisgarh HC8 Dec 2023WPS/4719/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh quashed an order rejecting a compassionate appointment claim filed by the deceased employee's sister. Relying on precedents regarding gender discrimination, the Court held that excluding sisters from such benefits is arbitrary and unjust. The respondent was directed to reconsider the claim within two months.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 18.07.2020 was quashed, and respondents were directed to consider the claim for compassionate appointment within two months.

Nanki Bai Vs South Eastern Coalfields… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 4719 of 2020

¶3

Nanki Bai Wd/o Late Jagdev Ram Aged About 55 Years R/o Village And Post Khamhariya, Block Udaypur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh

¶4

Ramkumari D/o Late Jagdev Ram Aged About 28 Years R/o Village And Post Khamhariya, Block Udaypur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through Its Chairman CumManaging Director, Seepat Road, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through Its General Manager, Bhatgaon, Area, District Surguja Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

¶9

---- Respondents

¶10

(Cause-title as taken from CIS System)

¶11

_____________________________________________________________ For Petitioners : Ms. Nirupama Bajpai, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. V.R. Tiwari, Senior Advocate with Mr. Prateek Tiwari, Advocate

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel

Order On Board

08/12/2023

Heard.

The Petitioner has preferred the instant petition seeking following reliefs :-

¶17

A. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the Petitioner from the possession of the respondents for its kind perusal.

¶18

B. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue Writ/ appropriate by directing the respondent to grant compassionate

¶19

appointment.

¶20

C. Any other relief or relief(s) which this Hon'ble Court may think proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted.

¶21

Facts of the case are that the Petitioner No.1 is mother and Petitioner No.2 is a real sister of late Durga Prasad who was working under the Respondent. After the death of the deceased/employee, an application for grant of compassionate appointment has been filed by Petitioner No.2 which has been rejected vide impugned order dated 18.07.2020 (Annexure P-4) on the ground that as the Petitioner No.2 is a sister of the deceased/employee, therefore, according to the Rules, she is not entitled to get compassionate appointment.

¶22

Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the matter is squarely covered with the judgment passed by this Court in case of The South Eastern Coalfields Limited and others Vs. Smt. Sahodri Gond and another (Writ Appeal No.183/2023 decided on 09.08.2023). Therefore, it is prayed that in light of the above judgment passed by this Court, the impugned order dated 18.07.2020 may be quashed and the Respondents may be directed to consider the claim of Petitioner No.2 for grant of compassionate appointment.

¶23

Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents submit that the Rules are not permitted them to provide compassionate appointment to Petitioner No.2 who is sister of the deceased/employee, therefore, on this ground only they have not provided benefit of compassionate appointment to Petitioner No.2.

¶24

I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶25

In Writ Appeal No.183/2023 (The South Eastern Coalfields Limited and others Vs. Smt. Sahodri Gond and another), the Division Bench of this Court has relied the judgment passed in case of Coal India Limited and Ors. Vs. Hamshikha Mallick (WA No.562 of 2016 decided on 06.12.2016) and held as under:-

¶26

“18. The absence of inclusion of Sister in the said category as

¶27

dependent have already been considered by this court in Writ Appeal No. 562 of 2016 (Coal India Limited and Others Vs. Miss Himshikha Mallick) decided on 06.12.2016 , holding that if dependency employment is confined to the brother of the deceased employee to the exclusion of sister it will amount to hostile discrimination only on the ground of gender. The classification purely on the ground of gender is wholly unjust and unfair without any rational basis. The impugned order by which the claim of the respondents was rejected by the appellants clearly shows the gender bias contrary to the spirit of Constitution of India where the only reason is the respondent no.2 happens to be sister of deceased employee.”

¶28

Considering the view taken by Division Bench of this Court in above mentioned judgment, it is quite vivid that merely on the ground of gender, Petitioner No.2 who is sister of the deceased/employee, her claim cannot be rejected. Hence, the impugned order dated 18.07.2020 (Annexure P-4) is liable to be and is hereby quashed.

¶29

The Respondents are directed to consider the claim of Petitioner No.2 for grant of compassionate appointment expeditiously preferably within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order in light of judgment passed by this Court in cases of Smt. Sahodri Gond (Supra) and Miss Himshikha Mallick (Supra).

¶30

With the above observation, the instant petition is disposed of.

¶31

Certified copy as per rules.

¶32

Sd/(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge

¶33

Shubham

Nanki Bai v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nanki Bai v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indrapal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nandlal Naik Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chitrasen Rathiya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Anil Kumar Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhagtu Ekka Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vinay Tandon Vs Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank