Dismissed

Chinta Devi v. the Chairman Cum Managing Director Central Coalfields Limited and Ors.

Jharkhand HC16 Aug 2016LPA/152/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand dismissed a limited appeal against a writ petition where the appellant sought compassionate appointment for her husband. The court refused to condone a delay of 1853 days, noting the purpose was frustrated due to the passage of over a decade.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of the appeal on the ground of uncondonable delay and lack of infirmity in the lower court's order.

Chinta Devi Vs the Chairman Cum Managing Director Central Coalfields Limited and Ors. — Jharkhand HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

L.P.A. No. 152 of 2016

¶3

with

¶4

I.A. No. 2590 of 2016

¶5

Chinta Devi, W/o Late Sukar Mahto, R/o Village-Sharda Colony, PO- Fusro, PS-Chandrapura, Distt.- Bokaro...........

¶6

Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, CCL, Darbhanga House, Ranchi 2. The Director, CCL, Darbhanga House, Ranchi

¶9

The Staff Officer (P) Dhari Area, CCL, PO & PS- Dhori, Bokaro

¶10

The Project Officer, N.S.Dhori Colliery, PO & PS-Makholi, Bokaro

¶11

The Deputy Personnel Manager, N.S.Dhori Colliery, PO & PS- Makholi District- Bokaro…………..... Respondents

¶12

Respondents

¶13

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shree Chandrashekhar

¶14

For the Appellant : Mr. Abhijit Kr. Singh, Advocate & Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. A.K.Das, Advocate & Miss. Pooja Kumari, Advocate

¶15

Order No. 07 /Dated : 16th August, 2016 Per Virender Singh, C.J. :

¶16

1 . Not only the appellant-writ petitioner has not been able to carve out any ground much less sufficient grounds for condonation of huge delay of 1853 days in filing the main appeal (L.P.A. No. 152 of 2016) impugning order dated 20^th January, 2011 of the learned Single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 5909 of 2010, on merits also no case for interference is made out. The writ petition stands dismissed mainly on the following grounds:-

¶17

“ (i) It appears that the husband of the present petitioner, who was working with the respondents, expired on 13^th June, 1998.

¶18

(ii) Thereafter, much time has been elapsed i.e. more than one decade period is over. Purpose for compassionate appointment has been frustrated because of the passage of more than a decade time.

¶19

(iii) It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P Vs. Paras Nath , as reported in (1998) 2 SCC 412 , in the case of Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & Ors . as reported in (2000) 7 SCC 192 and in the case of Santosh Kumar Dubey Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors . as reported in (2009) 6 SCC 481 . ”

¶20

-2-

¶21

2. We, finding no infirmity in the impugned judgment on any count, hereby decline to condone the aforesaid huge delay, condonation thereof is not otherwise satisfactorily explained. The appeal, on hand, thus merits dismissal on both the counts.

¶22

3 . The appellant-writ petitioner if otherwise is entitled to any monetary benefits due to her from the respondents, that aspect shall be looked into by the respondents without any waste of time.

¶23

Ordered accordingly .

¶24

(Virender Singh, C.J)

¶25

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J)

¶26

Mukund/-

Chinta Devi v. the Chairman Cum Managing Director Central Coalfields Limited and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinta Devi v. the Chairman Cum Managing Director Central Coalfields Limited and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mata Divri Add And Ors. Vs State of Bihar

Smt.Laxmi Murmu And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand

State of Jharkhand Vs Vijay Oraon

Dr Om Prakash Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Bipin Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Dhiraj Kumar Dubey Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.