1 2025:CGHC:42630-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 625 of 2025 Smt. Usha Bai (In Person) W/o Late Shiv Prasad Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Adbhar, Tahsil - Malkharouda, District - Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh Mobile No. 9131567817, 8435596060 ...Appellant(s) versus 1 - South Eastern Coal Field Limited, Through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director, South Eastern Coal Field Limited Headquarters, Seepat Road Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 2 - General Manager South Eastern Coal Field Limited, Sohagpur Area, District - Sahdol, Madhya Pradesh 3 - Area Personnel Manager South Eastern Coal Field Limited, Sohagpur Area, District - Sahdol, Madhya Pradesh 4 - Sub Area Manager South Eastern Coal Field Limited, Dhanpuri (O.C.M.), Post Sanjay Koyla Nagar, District - Shahdol, Madhya Pradesh 5 - Assistant Manager (Personnel) South Eastern Coal Field Limited, Dhanpuri (O.C.M.), Post Sanjay Koyla Nagar, District - Sahdol, Madhya Pradesh 6 - Satyam Kumar S/o Amaru Aged About 30 Years Working As Shawel Operator At South Eastern Coal Field Limited, Dhanpuri (O.C.M.), Post Sanjay Koyla Nagar, District - Sahdol, Madhya Pradesh ... Respondent(s) JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.08.23 13:14:07 +0530 2 For Appellant : Smt. Usha Bai (in person) For Respondent/ SECL : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Bajpai, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 22.08.2025 1. The appellant/ writ petitioner has filed this writ appeal assailing the order dated 29.04.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in WPS No. 5594 of 2019, by which, the learned Single Judge has disposed off the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner. 2. The brief facts of the case as projected by writ petitioner in WPS No. 5594 of 2019, is that the petitioner Usha Bai is widow of late Shiv Prasad, who was an employee of South Eastern Coal Field Limited who died in harness and during course of employment with SECL, therefore, as per Chapter -9 of National Coal Wage Agreement under Social Security Head, there is provision for grant of employment to the dependent of the employee who died in harness. Thereafter, respondent SECL has offered dependent employement to Usha Bai which she has refused due to medical difficulty, as such she has requested the SECL to provide dependent employment to respondent No. 6 who is brother of deceased employee, therefore, SECL has offered employment to 3 respondent Satyam Kumar on a condition that he will look after the petitioner. The record of the case further demonstrate that for some time Stayam Kumar respondent No. 6 has looked after her but later on he became negligent to discharge his moral and legal obligation of maintaining the petitioner, which has compelled the petitioner to file the writ petition with prayer to direct Satyam Kumar to deposit 50% of salary towards maintenance. The record of the case further demonstrate that the petitioner has prayed for cancellation of dependent employment granted to Satyam Kumar and prayed for grant of dependent employment to her daughter in place of Satyam Kumar. Further, Respondent no. 6 Satyam Kumar has filed WPS No. 6663 of 2019 wherein has prayed for quashing of order dated 03.04.2019 passed by SECL deducting 50% salary towards maintenance to Usha Bai on the count that 50% deduction from the salary is on higher pedestal as he has to look out his family if the 50% deduction is allowed for entire service period then it will be difficult for him to look after his own family. It has also been contended that the petitioner has suffered paralysis attack in the year 2015, as such he is unable to discharge his duty properly and unable to get complete salary, as such he has prayed for quashing of the impugned order dated 03.04.2019 issued by SECL. 3. The petitioner preferred the writ petition before the learned Single Judge and sought for following reliefs:- 4 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records in relates to the case of the petitioner from the possession of respondents for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to comply with the order dated 07.04.2019 (Annexure-P/1) issued by the respondent no.5 and further be pleased to direct the respondents to pay the 50% amount of the salary of the respondent no.6 to the petitioner from the date of order. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief/relief's in favour of the petitioners, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioner. 4. After hearing the parties the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition and observed thus at paras 4 to 8. In the order under challenge, the learned Single Judge has observed as under :- “4. This Court has issued various direction to the respondent Satyam Kumar as well as South Eastern Coal Field Limited vide order dated 30.09.2024 and has directed the SECL to deduct 40% salary of respondent Satyam Kumar thereafter Satyam Kumar 5 has also moved an application before this Court wherein he has stated that he is willing to pay the amount. Considering the submission, this Court has itself kept in abeyance the effect and operation of the order 30.09.2024 but the same has not been complied with, therefore, this Court has again directed the respondent to comply with the order passed by this Court on 12.02.2025 and the matter was taken up today for final hearing in the motion hearing itself. 5. Today, one additional memo of submission has been filed before this Court in WPS No. 6663 of 2019 by Satyam Kumar wherein it has been stated in paragraph-2 which is as under.- 2-That during the pendency of the petition the petitioner has realized the issue, and respectfully submitted that the petitioner is ready to pay Rs. 10,000/- per month as maintenance amount to the respondent No. 6 from 21.02. 2024 and the petitioner further ready to pay Rs. 8,000/- per month from 08.04.2019 as order on 26.11.2024 passed by this Hon'ble Court in the instant petition, the petitioner is also ready to deduct the above amount from the salary and deposit bank 6 account of the respondent No. 5 this Hon'ble Court may kindly be disposed of the petition with above observation. 6. The said submission is supported by affidavit of Satyam Kumar, from the said submission memo it is quite vivid that petitioner Satyam Kumar is ready to pay total Rs. 18,000/- which is sufficient amount for her survival of petitioner Usha Bai. The said additional submission memo is taken on record. 7. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. Considering the submission and subsequent development, the writ petitions are disposed of with a direction that the respondent/SECL shall deduct total Rs. 8,000/- as arrears which is recoverable from 08.04.2019 in addition to it Rs. 10,000/- as maintenance thus total Rs. 18,000/- will be deducted from the salary of respondent Satyam Kumar. It is also directed that respondent will not create hindrance in deduction of the said amount from his salary. Even otherwise, as per the policy of SECL for grant of dependent employment as well as undertaking given by Stayam Kumar. It is mandatory for him to look after 7 the other family members. It is made clear that if any delay tactics is adopted by respondent Satyam Kumar, the petitioner is at liberty to take recourse available under the law. 9. With these observations, the writ petitions are disposed of. No order as to the cost.” 5. Appellant in person submits that as per the terms and condition of compassionate appointment the respondent No. 6 was required to pay 50% of the total salary but he is not doing the same. She further submits that as respondent No. 6 is not taking care of her as he promised and is medically not fit to discharge his duties, the compassionate appointment be provided to her daughter. She further submits that as per the order of learned Single Judge the amount of maintenance has been reduced to Rs. 18,000/- which is a meager amount and is not sufficient. Thus, the present appeal be allowed. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/ SECL opposes the argument made and submits that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is just and proper and needs no interference. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with the petition. 8 8. Bare perusal of the records shows that husband of appellant died in harness and thereafter according to Chapter -9 of National Coal Wage Agreement under Social Security Head, the respondent SECL has offered employment to Usha Bai/ appellant but she refused to accept the same due to medical difficulty and thereafter the employment was given to brother/ respondent No. 6 and per the terms and condition of compassionate appointment he was to pay 50% of the salary as maintenance to the appellant. 9. Further perusal of the material available on record shows that the respondent No. 6 has suffered paralysis attack and is not medically fit and has his own family also to maintain and is not receiving full salary and for which he has prayed for reduction of 50% from payment of salary and has agreed to pay Rs. 18,000/- as maintenance. The learned Single Judge after appreciating the entire facts situation of the case has rightly passed the order impugned and there is no illegality or irregularity at all and the same does not warrant any interference of this Court. 10. Considering the same, this Court finds no ground to entertain the writ appeal. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Jyoti