1 2025:CGHC:26329 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1182 of 2017 1 - Samay Das (Died) Through Lrs. As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 16-06-2021 And 11-05-2023. 1.1 - (A) Smt. Lolo Devi Wd/o. Late Samay Das Aged About 51 Years Occupatin House Wife, Both Are Resident Of Village Anrokha, P.S. And Post Bhatgaon, Tahsil Bhaiyathan District Surajpur Chhattisgarh 1.2 - (B) Lallu Ram Kaneriya S/o. Late Samay Das, Aged About 27 Years Occupatin Cultivator, Both Are Resident Of Village Anrokha, P.S. And Post Bhatgaon, Tahsil Bhaiyathan District Surajpur Chhattisgarh 2 - Santosh Kumar, S/o Samay Das, Aged About 31 Years R/o. Village Anrokha, Post And P.S. Bhatgaon, Tahsil Bhaiyathan, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through The Chairman Cum Managing Director, Seepat Road, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - The General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bhatgaon Area, Post Office Bhatgaon Colliery, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sub Area Manager, Bhatgaon Sub Area, S E C L, Surguja, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 4 - The Personnel Manager, Bhatgaon Area, Post Office Bhatgaon Colliery, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 5 - Medical Screening Board, Through The Members At Hospital Churcha At Baikunthpur Area, S E C L, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advocate along with REKHA SINGH Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH -2- Mr. Vikash Ghritlahre, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Atul Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 20.06.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1. This Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus/certiorari or of like nature to quash the impugned medical report/certificate dated 25/07/2015 declaring the petitioner medically unfit and further direct the respondents to provide the benefit of compassionate appointment to petitioner No. 2 as per the provisions of NCWA. 10.2. That, command/direction may kindly be pleased to call the entire record related with the service and medical treatment of the petitioner under the respondents. 10.3. Any other relief, which is deemed fit and proper may also be awarded to the Petitioner including the cost of the petition.” 2. Mr. Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the late Samay Das was working as SDL Helper Category IV in Mahamaya Underground Mines, Bhatgaon Area. He suffered an accident which resulted in damage to his kidney and he remained bedridden for a considerable period. He could not attend his duties from 13.05.2010. Late Samay Das made several representations to declare him medically unfit under the National Coal Wages Agreement before the respondent authorities but no action was taken. Mr. Shukla would also submit that the late Samay Das was appointed on 01.11.1980. It is contended that the late Samay Das was referred twice to the Apollo Hospital for medical treatment in the month of March, 2011 and August, 2012. 3 He would state that he was admitted to the MMI Narayana Multi- Specialty Hospital on 10.06.2015. It is argued that the application moved by the petitioner to declare him unfit was rejected by the respondent authorities vide order dated 08.08.2015. Mr. Shukla would also argue that WPS No.1862 of 2016 was preferred by the petitioner and he was granted liberty to challenge the decision of the respondents in an appropriate reconstituted petition vide order dated 14.06.2016. Mr. Shukla would further state that the petitioner has challenged the decision taken by the respondents whereby the late Samay Das was not declared medically unfit. He would contend that the relevant documents issued by the Apollo Hospital Bilaspur and MMI Narayana Multi Specialty Hospital Raipur were placed before the respondent authorities even though the claim of late Samay Das to declare him medically unfit was not considered. He would pray to allow this petition. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Kesharwani, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/SECL would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Shukla. He would submit that the application of the petitioner was considered by the respondent authorities and his prayer to declare him medically unfit was declined vide letter dated 08.08.2015 by the Medical Screening Board. He would further submit that at present, late Samay Das is no more as he died on 29.04.2021, therefore, his claim to declare him medically unfit cannot be considered and no appointment can be provided to his dependent. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the -4- documents placed on the record. 5. Taking into consideration the fact that late Samay Das is no more as he died on 29.04.2021; his application to declare him medically unfit was rejected by the Medical Screening Board on 08.08.2015; the claim of Late Samay Lal to declare him medically unfit can’t be considered after his death and no appointment can be provided to any of his dependents, therefore, I do not find any good ground to entertain this petition. Thus, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha