Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 33735 (JHR)

SAMIR KUMAR CHATTERJEE v. COAL INDIA LIMITED, THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN

WPC/5499/2025 · 2025-10-08

Sri Ananda Sen

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:JHHC:31061 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(S) No.5499 of 2025 ----- Samir Kumar Chatterjee, son of late Tulsi Charan Chatterjee, resident of 301A Dreamz Apartment Lower Vidyapatinagar Kanke Road, PO Ranchi University, PS Gonda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand 834008, through his son Samrat Chatterjee, son of Samir Kumar Chatterjee, R/o 301A Dreamz Apartment Lower Vidyapatinagar Kanke Road, PO Ranchi University, PS Gonda, District Ranchi, Jharkhand 834008 … Petitioner(s). Versus 1.Coal India Limited, Maharatna Company, Indian Public Sector Undertaking, “Coal Bhawan, Premises No. 04, MAR, Plot No. AF III, Action Area, O1A, New Town, Rajharhat, PO and PS New town, Kolkata 700156, WB, through its Chairman 2.The Chairman, Coal India Limited, Indian Public Sector Undertaking, Coal Bhawan, Premises No. 04, MAR Plot No. AF III, Action Area, 01-A, New Town Rajharhat, PO and PS New Town, Kolkata-700156, WB 3.The Director (P&IR), Coal India Limited, Indian Public Sector Undertaking, Coal Bhawan, Premises No. 04, MAR Plot No. AF III, Action Area, 01-A, New Town Rajharhat, PO and PS New Town, Kolkata-700156, WB 4.The Chairman cum Managing Director, Central Mines Planning & Design Institute Ltd., a subsidiary of Coal India Limited, Government of India Public Sector, Undertaking Gondwana Place, Kanke Road, PO and PS Kanke Thana, Ranchi, 834031, Jharkhand 5.The General Manager (Personnel & Executive Establishment), Coal India Limited (A Maharatna Company), Coal Bhawan, Premise No. 04 MAR, Plot No. AF-III, Action Area-1-A, Town Rajarhat Kolkata, PO and PS New Town, 700156 (W.B.) 6.Chief of Medical Services, Coal India Limited, Coal Bhawan, Premises No. 04 MAR, Plot No. AF-III Action Area 01-A, New Town, Rajharhat, PO and PS New Town, Kolkata 700156, WB 7.Deputy Chief Medical Officer (HOD PRMB Cell), Central Mines Planning & Design Institute Limited, Government of India, Public Sector, Undertaking Gondwara Place, Kanke Road, PO and PS Kanke Thana, Ranchi, 834031, Jharkhand 8.The Union of India, through Hon’ble Minister of Coal, Ministry of Coal, Shastri Bhawan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, PO and PS Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 2025:JHHC:31061 2 9.The Secretary, Ministry of Coal, Shastri Bhawan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, PO and PS Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 … Respondent(s). CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mukesh Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the UOI : Mr. Anil Kumar, ASGI Mrs. Niki Sinha, CGC For the CCL : Mr. Amit Kr. Sinha, Advocate …...... 05 /08.10.2025: Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “i. for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to bring suitable amendment/modification with respect to sub clause-C of Clause 3.2.1 of contributory post retirement Medicare scheme for executives of CIL and its subsidiaries (CPRMSE) by enhancing the maximum amount reimbursable during the entire life for the retired executives and spouse together from Rs. 25,00,000/- to Rs. 50,00,000/- applicable in respect of general diseases only i.e. other than the diseases (sub- clause-D) for which the upper limit is not applicable. ii. The petitioner further prays for a direction upon the respondent authorities to decide and dispose of the representation of the petitioner, having submitted for consideration of enhanced of upper capping for lifetime treatment of general diseases from Rs. 25,00,000/- to Rs. 50,00,000/-.” 3. From the prayer itself it is quite clear that the petitioner wants modification and amendment of the scheme which has been framed by the employer. 4. Admittedly the particular scheme has been framed by the employer. The petitioner wants some modification/amendment in the scheme to suit the petitioner. 5. The Court exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot give direction to modify/amend any scheme. If a particular scheme is ultra-vires, the Court can interfere with it. The petitioner is not in a position to show as to how the scheme is 2025:JHHC:31061 3 ultra-vires. 6. Thus, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition, the same is dismissed. 7. The petitioner is directed to approach the Management. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 08.10.2025 Tanuj/CP-2