BACHANDEO KUMAR Vs. BHARAT COKING COAL LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE mother of the petitioner, namely, late Munarki Kamin, was working as Coal Stacker in Fularitand colliery under Area No. 1 of M/s B.C.C.L. Dhanbad with effect from 17.10.1971. She died on 18.7.1996 in harness due to illness. The petitioner applied on 7.8.1997, i.e. after a period of one year from the date of the death of his mother, to the respondents for appointment on a future date when he attains majority. The claim of the petitioner was not accepted and was communicated to him vide letter dated 29/30.5.1998. The petitioner again received a letter dated 15.5.1999 from the office of Dy. Personnel Manager, Barora Area, informing him that immediate employment to one of the dependant can be provided if the age of the dependant is 15 years, but as the petitioner has mentioned his age as 14 years in his application and at the time of death of his mother his age was 11 years as such his request for employment cannot be considered. The petitioner claims to have made another representation on 14.7.1999 to the Dy. Chief Personnel Manager, Barora Area No. 1. This was followed by another representation dated 3.9.2002 in the prescribed form wherein he requested for consideration of his case for employment in the light of the documents. Yet the petitioner filed another representation on 23rd July, 2003 followed by another representation dated 1.11.2004. The Project Officer, Fularitand Colliery sent a letter dated 25.3.2004/16.4.2004 to the Dy. Chief Personnel Manager, Barora Area No. I recommending the case of the petitioner for taking action on the basis of another application of the petitioner dated 30th January, 2004. The Dy. Chief Personnel Manager, Barora Area vide letter dated 9.6.2004 addressed to the General Manager (P&IR) of M/s B.C.C.L. conveyed that the claim of the petitioner is belated and sought for opinion whether the claim of the petitioner and request of the Union should be entertained or not?. The petitioner was informed vide letter dated 2/4. 8.2004 that his application is regretted by Competent authority on the ground that at the time of death of his mother he was minor and only 12 years of age. It was further mentioned in the letter that at the relevant period the NCWA -V was in force in Coal Industry and as per NCWA -V the minimum age required for male dependant was 15 years as on the date of death of deceased to be kept on live roster of company. The petitioner yet made another representation on 1.9.2004, which was also replied vide letter dated 22/24.11. 2004, wherein it was stated that as per Para 9.5.0.(iii) N.C.W.A.V the effective date of such cases is from 1.1:2000 and not 1.7.1996, as such there is no scope to review the previous decision. The petitioner has challenged this communication as also the letter dated 2/4.8.2004 whereby the claim of the petitioner for employment on compassionate ground has been rejected.

(2.) RELIANCE has been placed on Clause 9.5.0 of para(iii) of NCWA -V. Relevant extract of Clause 9.5.0 is quoted hereunder : Provision of employment/monetary compensation to female dependants of workmen who die while in service and who are declared medically unfit as per Clause 9.4,0 above would be regulated as under: (i) .. (ii) .. (iii) In case of death either in mine accident or for other reasons or medical unfitness under Clause 9.4.0, if no employment has been offered and the male dependant of the concerned worker is 12 years and above in age, he will be kept on a live roster and would be provided employment commensurate with his skill and qualifications when he attains the age of 18 years. During the period the male dependant is on live roster, the female dependant will be paid monetary compensation as per rates at paras (i) and (ii) above. This will be effective from 1.1.2000

(3.) RESPONDENTS in the counter affidavit filed by the Personnel Manager, while raising the question of maintainability of the writ petition, have stated that the petitioner may raise an Industrial dispute, being a workman, in view of a Division Bench Judgment of this Court reported in 1995(1) P.L.J.R. 43(DB). On merit of this controversy, it is stated that at the time of death of the deceased. Munarki Kamin, the petitioner was less than 12 years of age and thus he is not entitled to get employment under Clause 9.3.2 of NCWA -VI. It is further stated that the male dependant of the deceased workman could have been kept on live roster provided the dependant was aged 15 years or above as per Clause 9.5.0 of NCWA -V or NCWA -VI. It is further slated that the provision relating to keeping minor dependant on the live roster has been modified w.e.f. 1.1.2000 inasmuch as from this date the dependant who is aged 12 years or more could be kept on live roster. Since the case of the petitioner is not covered as his mother died on 18.7.1996, he is not entitled to benefit of the same.