MIRA BAURI Vs. EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the petitioner and the respondent Eastern Coalfields Limited. The petitioner who claims herself to be the legally wedded wife of late Milan Bauri, has sought direction upon the respondents for payment of death-cum-retiral benefits of the said employee who is said to have died on 29th May 2010 in harness.

(2.) According to the petitioner, her marriage was solemnized on 6th December 1984 and it was registered before the Marriage Officer, Dhanbad on 30th September 1999, as per certificate at Annexure-1. She has made representation before the Agent, Rajpur Colliery under the respondent E.C.L. vide Annexure-3 indicating the names of two sons and two daughters born out of the marriage with the late employee. The name of Pintu Bauri as the son have been indicated therein. However, there are no documents on record to substantiate the claim of the petitioner that any of these dependents are in the official records of the deceased employee.

(3.) The case of the respondent-ECL is that in the service records of the deceased employee, name of Mira Bauri does not appear anywhere, rather Kamla Bauri is the nominee in the service record as wife. There are no judicial declaration of the marriage of the petitioner with the deceased employee, nor any certificate of the dissolution of the marriage of Kamla Bauri with the late employee. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner has been strongly resisted. In the wake of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner has failed to make out a case for directing the respondents to make payment of any death-cum-retiral dues of the deceased employee or for compassionate appointment of her son whose name is shown as Kanchan Bauri while other document in the writ petition such as annexure-3 shows him as Pintu Bauri. Therefore, in such a disputed state of facts, in exercise of writ jurisdiction, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. I.A. stands closed.