Vinita Sinha, W/o Late Manoj Kumar Sinha v. Coal India Limited
2025-10-15
Ananda Sen
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
JUDGMENT : Heard learned counsel representing the petitioners and learned counsel representing the respondents. 2. The petitioners are not pursuing the first prayer, which is the challenge thrown to clause-9.4.2 of the National Coal Wage Agreement (NCWA). 2.1. The second prayer of the petitioners is to quash Letter e0iz0 ch0 dk0fo0 No. / -2/ /2021/685 dated 27/28.07.2021, whereby the application of petitioner No.1 – Vinita Sinha (widow of the deceased employee – Manoj Kumar Sinha) for grant of compassionate appointment to her married daughter – Surbhi Sinha (petitioner No.2 / daughter of the deceased employee - Manoj Kumar Sinha), was rejected. 2.2. Further prayer has been made to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner No.2. 3. Admittedly, the petitioner No.1 is the widow of Manoj Kumar Sinha (deceased) and petitioner No.2 is the daughter of Manoj Kumar Sinha (deceased). 4. In this case, compassionate appointment was claimed for the married daughter (petitioner No.2). 5. Late Manoj Kumar Sinha, joined the Bharat Coking Coal Limited (BCCL), on 28.08.1985. He died in harness on 01.10.2020, while working on the post of Accountant. 6. It is the case of the petitioners that Manoj Kumar Sinha, died leaving behind these two petitioners as his legal heirs being petitioner No.1 (wife) and petitioner No.2 (daughter, who is now married). The daughter claims compassionate appointment as her mother stated that she is completely dependent upon her daughter. 7. Admittedly, the National Coal Wage Agreement (NCWA) is an Agreement between the Union and the Management. The same is in terms of Section 18 of the Industrial Disputes Act. The National Coal Wage Agreement at that relevant point of time did not provide grant of compassionate appointment to the married daughters, as the married daughters were not treated to be the dependent of the deceased-employee, who dies in harness. 8. On the aforesaid ground, the application for compassionate appointment of the petitioner No.2 was rejected. 9. The respondents vide their Letter No. e0iz0/ch0-2/dk0fo 0/2022/64(A) dated 25.01.2022 2/ /2022/64(A) dated 25.01.2022 had directed petitioner No.1 to claim monetary compensation, which she is entitled to receive on account of death of her husband – late Manoj Kumar Sinha. They also instructed petitioner No.1 to file an appropriate application claiming monetary compensation. 10. There is a provision in the National Coal Wage Agreement to grant monetary compensation. Chapter-IX of the NCWA deals with Social Securities.
They also instructed petitioner No.1 to file an appropriate application claiming monetary compensation. 10. There is a provision in the National Coal Wage Agreement to grant monetary compensation. Chapter-IX of the NCWA deals with Social Securities. Clause-9.5.0 provides for an Employment / Monetary compensation to female dependant. Clause-9.5.0 (ii) provides that where an employee dies in harness, other than mine accident, if the female dependent is below the age of 45 years, she has an option either to accept the monetary compensation of Rs.3,000/- per month or employment. In case, if the female dependant is aged above 45 years, she is only entitled for the monetary compensation and not for the employment. It is necessary to quote clause-9.5.0 (ii), which reads as hereunder:- “ 9.5.0 Employment/Monetary compensation to female dependant (i) ………… ii) In case of death/total permanent disablement due to cause other than mine accident and medical unfitness under Clause 9.4.0, if the female dependant is below the age of 45 years she will have the option either to accept the monetary compensation of Rs. 3,000/- per month or employment. In case the female dependant is above 45 years of age she will be entitled only to monetary compensation and not to employment” 10.1. Further, clause-9.5.0 (iv) provides that the monetary compensation would be paid till the female dependant attains the age of 60 years. 11. In this case, husband of petitioner No.1 died on 01.10.2020. At that point of time, the age of petitioner No.1 who is the wife, was 56 years. Being a female dependant above 45 years, she was not eligible to be employed on compassionate ground. Since the married daughter was also not eligible (as per the NCWA as it then was), for compassionate appointment, it is the duty of the respondents to provide monetary compensation to the female dependant i.e. the wife. Be it noted that the rate of the monetary compensation is around Rs.39,000/- per month, as on date. 12. Admittedly, the monetary compensation has not been paid to the female dependant. 13. The plea which the respondent has taken is that the wife has not applied for monetary compensation. 14. From the facts of this case, I hold that the wife could not have applied for monetary compensation as her daughter was bonafidely pursuing her claim for compassionate appointment.
Admittedly, the monetary compensation has not been paid to the female dependant. 13. The plea which the respondent has taken is that the wife has not applied for monetary compensation. 14. From the facts of this case, I hold that the wife could not have applied for monetary compensation as her daughter was bonafidely pursuing her claim for compassionate appointment. Once the compassionate appointment was rejected, it was the duty of the respondents to pay the monetary compensation after completing the formalities and after going through the facts of the case. The widow could not have been denied the said benefit of monetary compensation. 14.1. Thus, the petitioner No.1 is entitled for monetary compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment from the date of death of the employee namely Manoj Kumar Sinha, till the date she had attained the age of 60 years. The amount of monetary compensation along with its revision from time to time be paid to the petitioner No.1, for the aforesaid period within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 14.2. The respondents will ensure completion of necessary formalities i.e. filling up of the forms etc., to which petitioner No.1 should cooperate. 15. With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition stands disposed of.