Disposed

Bhawani Bouri v. M/S Bharat Coking Coal Limited

Jharkhand HC11 Nov 2016WPC/3509/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought direction for compassionate appointment and retirement benefits for the petitioner following the death of her son-in-law. The High Court directed the employer to consider the petitioner's application within eight weeks upon receipt of representations and relevant documents.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file representation with documents within eight weeks; direction to employer to consider and pass reasoned order within eight weeks thereafter; release of benefits within four weeks if enti

Bhawani Bouri Vs M/S Bharat Coking Coal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2016)

¶1

W.P.(S) No. 3509 of 2008

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶4

W.P.(S) No. 3509 of 2008

¶5

Bhawani Bouri, wife of Late Mihir Bouri

¶6

… … … Petitioner

¶7

-V e r s u s -

¶8

M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director.

¶9

Director Personnel, M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Dhanbad.

¶10

General Manager, South Jharia Colliery, Area No. VIII (Kustore) of M/s. BCCL, Dhanbad.

¶11

The Project Officer, Rajapur Colliery of M/s. BCCL, Dhanbad.

¶12

… … … Respondents.

¶13

CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S. N. PATHAK

¶14

For the Petitioner : Mr. Binod Kumar Jha, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. A.K. Mehta, Advocate.

¶15

07/11.11.2016. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

The instant writ petition has been filed with a prayer for direction upon the respondents to immediately give employment to the petitioner on compassionate ground under Clause 9.3.2 of National Coal Wage Agreement – III – IV as her mother-in-law died in harness. The petitioner has further prayed for a direction to give all retiral benefits including gratuity and life cover scheme to the petitioner of her late mother-in-law who was Wagon Loader in Rajapur Open Cast Project, Kustore Area who died in harness.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after death of employee Chari Bourin, her son Mihir Bouri applied for his appointment on compassionate ground. However, on the ground of being over age, his application was rejected by the respondents authorities. Thereafter, the petitioner being daughter-in-law of the deceased-employee applied for her appointment on compassionate ground as per rules of the Company. It is further submitted that all the legal heirs of deceased-employee have sworn an affidavit and given 'No-Objection Certificate' in favour of the petitioner and authorised her to take service in place of deceased employee as per N.C.W.A. - III – IV. It is further submitted that time and again various documents have been demanded by the respondents authorities but even after fulfilling all requirements the case of the petitioner has not been considered nor she has been granted monetary benefits after death of deceased-employee.

¶18

Learned counsel for the respondents, by referring counter affidavit submits that petitioner has not submitted marriage certificate issued by

¶19

W.P.(S) No. 3509 of 2008

¶20

¶21

competent authority showing genuine relationship of petitioner with son of deceased-employee. It is further submitted that petitioner is not direct dependent of Late Chari Baurin. It is also pointed out that as per entry made by Late Chari Baurin in the year 1987 in Service Excerpts, age of the petitioner has been shown as 28 years as on 01.04.1987 i.e. 51 years as on 2009 and as such, as per the provisions contained in N.C.W.A.-5, the petitioner has crossed age of employment.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is entitled at least for the monetary benefits and retiral benefits of deceased-employee and, therefore, she may be given liberty to approach before respondents authorities for consideration of her case for monetary benefits.

¶23

Be that as it may, considering facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner is given liberty to file representation before the respondent no. 4 along with relevant documents within a period of eight weeks from today. If such representation is filed by the petitioner, the concerned respondent is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate reasoned order within a period of eight weeks thereafter. It is made clear that if the petitioner is found to be entitled for the benefits claimed by her, the same be released in her favour within a period of four weeks thereafter.

¶24

With the aforesaid observations and directions this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶25

(Dr. S. N. Pathak, J.)

¶26

RC/PKS

Bhawani Bouri v. M/S Bharat Coking Coal Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhawani Bouri v. M/S Bharat Coking Coal Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pankaj Giri Alias Pankaj Kumari Giri Vs The Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. Through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director And Ors.

Ram Swaroop Manjhi Vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited Through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director And Ors.

Bigan Bhuia Vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited Through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director And Ors.

Kabita Kumari Vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited And O

Mrs Renu Singh Vs Jharkhand Gramin Bank

Alka Devi Vs Jharkhand Urja Vikash Nigam Limited through Its Chairman and Ors.