1 2025:CGHC:50175 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2716 of 2023 1 - Smt. Ratan Bai W/o Late Chhat Ram Aged About 50 Years R/o Village- Charpara (Lotlota) P. O. Gopalpur, Tehsil- Katghora, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through Charman-Cum Managing Director, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director (Personnel) South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - General Manager (Mining) South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Kusmunda Area, P. O. Kusmunda Colliery, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 4 - Area Personnel Manager South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Kusmunda Project, P. O. Kusmunda Colliery, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 5 - Senior Manager (Personnel) South Eastern Coalfields Limited, RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Kusmunda Project P. O. Kusmunda Colliery, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anmol Singh, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Prakash Tiwari, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 08/10/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioner. 10.2. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 23.07.2022 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.5. 10.3. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to hold that the petitioner is entitled for monetary compensation as per the provisions of National Coal Wage Agreement from the date the husband of petitioner expired. 10.4. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of monetary compensation 3 and to release the entire amount from the date of death of her husband till the date of sanction ie. 01.06.2019 alongwith interest. 10.5. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper may also be awarded to the petitioner including the cost of the petition.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner is the wife of the late Chhat Ram, who served as Head Peon at the Kusmunda Project. Her husband passed away on January 24, 2015. After his death, the petitioner nominated herself for dependent employment, however, her application was kept pending for a long time and ultimately rejected on the grounds that she was overage. During this period, while her application was under consideration, no monetary compensation— to which she was entitled—was paid. Subsequently, the petitioner nominated her son-in-law for dependent employment, but his application was also delayed and eventually rejected for similar reasons. Following the death of Late Chhat Ram, the petitioner lived in poverty and pursued her claim for dependent employment with the authorities. Finding no relief, she requested at least monetary compensation, which was granted from June 1, 2019, although she was entitled to it either immediately after her husband’s death or at least from the time she first applied. The petitioner, in good faith and hope of 4 employment, awaited a decision, but the respondent authorities failed to provide the monetary compensation during the entire intervening period. Consequently, the petitioner made a representation seeking the release of the differential amount of monetary compensation owed to her, which was rejected by the impugned order, leading to the present petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner respectfully submits that the petitioner has not been paid the differential amount of monetary compensation that is rightfully due and payable to him. It is contended that despite repeated representations and the passage of considerable time, the authorities have failed to disburse the balance amount, which constitutes a clear lapse on their part and has resulted in financial hardship and prejudice to the petitioner. The learned counsel further asserts that the non- payment of the differential compensation is unjustified, arbitrary, and contrary to the principles of fairness and equity, warranting the immediate intervention of this Hon’ble Court to ensure that the petitioner receives the full extent of the compensation to which he is legally entitled 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents has placed on record documentary evidence demonstrating that the outstanding amount, previously under contention, has in fact been duly settled. According to the documents submitted, a 5 payment amounting to Rs. 12,75,343.37/- has already been made by the respondents, thereby addressing and discharging the financial liability in question. This submission is intended to establish that no further amount remains payable on their part, and that the claim has effectively been satisfied to the extent indicated in the records produced before this Hon’ble Court 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, respectfully submits that in light of the fact that the grievance raised by the petitioner stands duly redressed in accordance with the documents and materials now placed on record by the respondents, he does not wish to press the present petition any further. It is, therefore, prayed that the petition may kindly be disposed of as having been rendered infructuous in view of the subsequent developments and the satisfaction of the petitioner with the steps taken by the concerned authorities. 6. In light of the foregoing observations, the writ petition is hereby disposed of, subject to a thorough and accurate verification of the amount that has been received by the respondents. This verification process shall be conducted with due diligence to ensure clarity and fairness before any further proceedings or conclusions are drawn. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Raghu Jat Judge