High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/577/2018disposed off

Nirpes v. South Eastern Coalfields Ltd.

2018-01-16Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.577 of 2018 Nirpes, S/o late Parsu Ram, aged about 26 years, R/o Mohan Colony, Haldibari (Chirmiri), P.S. Chirmiri, District Korea (CG). ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. South Eastern Coalfields Limited, through the Chairman cum Managing Director, Head Quarter, Seepat Road, P.S. Sarkanda, Bilaspur (CG).

2. Director (Personnel), South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Head Quarter, Seepat Road, P.S. Sarkanda, Bilaspur (CG).

3. Chief General Manager, Chirmiri Area, P.S. Podi (West Chirimiri), Chirimiri, District Korea (CG).

4. Sub Area Manager, New Chirmiri Pondri, Hill Colliery, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Chirimiri Area, Chirimiri, P.S. Chirimiri District Korea (CG).

--- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. N.Naha Roy, Advocate For Respondents :

Mr. V.R. Tiwari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 16/01/2018 (1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner being a son of Late Parsu Ram, who has died during service on 17.11.2011, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for grant of dependent employment in terms of National Coal Wage Agreement (NCWA) for which he has already made application before respondent-SECL for grant of dependent employment on 21.05.2012, but more than 6 years have been gone even if till this date no decision has been taken on the application by the respondent-SECL, against which this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner.

(2) Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-SECL would submit that the petitioner's application for grant of dependent employment will be considerd and decided by the respondent authorities within a period of six weeks from today. (3) Since the petitioner's application for grant of dependent employment is pending consideration before the respondent-SECL w.e.f. 21.05.2012, therefore, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent-SECL to hear the petitioner and take a decision on the application within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The respondent No.1 is directed to look into the matter as to why SECL could not take a decision on the petitioner's application till this date.

(4) With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L/-