RANJU KUMARI v. CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED
WPC/2580/2025 · 2025-06-17
Deepak Roshan
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8682 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8682 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:JHHC:15836 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S). No. 2580 of 2025
----------
1. Ranju Kumari, d/o. Suresh Bhuiyan, aged about 31 years, At.-Bhaga No. 5, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. Bhaga, P.S. Jharia, District Dhanbad-
828301.
2. Suresh Bhuiyan, s/o. late Binda Bhuiyan, aged about 60 years, At.- Bhaga No. 5, Near Shiv Mandir, P.O. Bhaga, P.S. Jharia, District Dhanbad-828301.
…. Petitioners Versus
1. Chairman-cum-Managing Director, M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited, At. Koyla Bhawan, P.O. Koyla Nagar, BCCL Township, P.S. Saraidhela, District Dhanbad-826005.
2. Director (P), M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited, At. Koyla Bhawan, P.O. Koyla Nagar, BCCL Township, P.S. Saraidhela, District Dhanbad-826005.
3. General (P & IR), M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited, At. Koyla Bhawan, P.O. Koyla Nagar, BCCL Township, P.S. Saraidhela, District Dhanbad-826005.
4. General Manager, Lodna Area of M/s. BCCL, At. Bhaga, P.O. Bhaga, P.S. Jorapokhar, District Dhanbad.-828301.
5. Project Officer, South Tisra Project under Lodna Area of M/s. BCCL, At. Khas Jinagara, P.O. Khas Jinagara, P.S. Tisra, District Dhanbad-
828115.
………. Respondents. ----------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
----------- For the Petitioners
: Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Uday Prakash, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. Alpana Verma, Advocate
---------- 02/ 17.06.2025 By way of present writ application, the petitioners have prayed for a direction upon respondents to appoint petitioner No. 1 on compassionate ground against retirement of her father (petitioner No. 2) on medical ground, as per the provisions contained in Clause-9.4.0 of the NCWA-X.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that suffice it would be if a direction is given to respondent No. 3 to consider the case petitioner No. 1 for appointment on compassionate ground in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations in a stipulated period of time.
3.
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that though no counter- affidavit has been filed, however, she has been instructed by her client that
2025:JHHC:15836 2
the appointment under Clause-9.4.0 of the NCWA is on hold for the time being.
4. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and submissions, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the 3rd respondent to treat this writ application as representation and take a decision with regard to the claim of the petitioner No. 1 for appointment within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. It goes without saying that the decision should be taken strictly in accordance with the provisions of the applicable National Coal Wage Agreement (NCWA) and if the case of the petitioner falls within the aforesaid clause, necessary order for appointment be issued within a further period of 2 weeks.
6. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands disposed of in the manner indicated hereinabove.
(Deepak Roshan, J.) kunal/-