MANAGER (ER) Vs. PREETI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner is that her husband was working with the Indian Oil Corporation namely the appellant herein. He died in service on 22/5/2013 on account of an accident. He survived by his wife and minor three year old son as on that date. Seeking appointment on the ground of the death of her husband while in service, she made an application to the respondent/employer. The same was rejected. Questioning the same, the instant petition was filed.

(2.) The learned Single Judge by the impugned order quashed the order of rejection and directed the employer to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment subject to her fulfilling other conditions. Questioning the same, the respondent/employer is in appeal.

(3.) Shri Aditya Adhikari, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants contends that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is incorrect. That, the clause on which the re-employment was sought for does not include a widow. In the absence of including a widow, an appointment could not be made. He further submits that the clause relied upon by the petitioner is part of a memorandum of settlement dtd. 12/4/1990 arrived at between the employer and the employees. That, it was a memorandum of settlement with various clauses. The same contained Annexure-1 wherein Option No.3 was for employment on the death of an employee. Since, the same does not include a widow, it cannot be granted. That, such a scheme cannot be modified by the orders of the Court. Hence, he relies on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 1959 Madras 441 (The Employees in the Caltex (India), Ltd. Madras and another vs. The Commissioner of Labour and Conciliation Officer, Government of Madras and another), (1978) 2 SCC 133 (New Standard Engineering Company Ltd. vs. N.L. Abhyankar and others) and 2002 AIR SCW 630 (I.T.C. Ltd., Workers Welfare Association and another vs. The Management of ITC Ltd. and others).