1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1043 OF 2011. Varsha Sudhakar Rasegaonkar. ..Vrs.. The Western Coalfields Limited, Civil Lines, Nagpur thr. it’s Director (P). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders. (Mr. S. D. Thakur, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S. C. Mehadia, Advocate for respondent.) --00-- CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & A. P. BHANGALE, J J. DATED : 17 th. August, 2011. This Court has already issued notice for final disposal. Accordingly, we have heard Mr. S. D. Thakur, learned Counsel for petitioner and Mr. S. C. Mehadia, learned Counsel for respondent sole. The fact that husband of the petitioner died on 07/05/2007 while in employment, is not in dispute. The lady claimed employment on compassionate ground in accordance with National Coal Wage Agreement-VI particularly in Clause 9.5.0 thereof. There was earlier round of litigation and in Writ Petition N0.1248 of 2010 vide order dated 25/06/2010 matter was sent back to respondent to take fresh decision. Therefore decision taken thereafter on 30th July,2010 has been questioned in present petition. 2 Mr. Thakur, learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that employment was claimed in the year 2007 itself and on that time four sons of deceased were minor. He further contends that as per Clause 9.5.0 of the National Coal Wage Agreement-VI is open to the petitioner, who is below 45 years of age either to opt for employment or to accept monetary compensation. He further points out that names of minor above 12 years can be placed on Live Roster for grant of compassionate employment after reaching the age of 18 years, if the petitioner is not in a position to accept such employment. Only in that case, the petitioner can be made to accept monetary compensation. Mr. Mehadia, learned counsel for the respondent, points out that the petitioner had during hearing filed affidavit on 04.12.2007 which is of minor sons and which is not a legal document. He points out that those minors are shown to have joined Mahanubhav Panth and, therefore, renounced worldly life. This affidavit is sworn by their uncle on their behalf and hence it has not been accepted. He further states that one of those two sons has now completed 18 years of age and therefore he is entitled to grant of employment. He states that if said son claimed employment respondent is ready and willing to consider him. Lastly, without prejudice he points out that employment with the respondent is hazardous in nature and, therefore, normally ladies are not preferred for the same. 3 After hearing respective Counsel, we find that present controversy is covered by Clause 9.5.0 (II) of the National Coal Wage Agreement-VI. The petitioner is below 45 years of age and, therefore, under that Clause it is open for her either to accept monetary compensation of Rs. 3,000/- (Rs. Three Thousand Only) per month or employment. Here, she has refused to accept monetary compensation and claimed employment only. That Clause also stipulates that if such female dependent is above 45 years of age, she is entitled only to monetary compensation and not to employment. Clause 9.5.0 (III) of the National Coal Wage Agreement-VI considers the situation in which the employment can not be offered to such woman/female dependent who is above 45 years of age. In that contingency, a male dependent of concerned worker who is above 12 years can be kept on Live Roster and provided employment on compassionate ground as per his skill and qualification, when he attains the age of 18 years. This arrangement envisaged in Clause 9.5.0 (III) of the National Coal Wage Agreement-VI comes into picture only when woman is not claiming or not eligible for employment. Here the position is otherwise petitioner is entitled to employment as per right given to her under Clause 9.5.0 (II) of the National Coal Wage Agreement-VI. The other reason of hazardous nature of employment being given is also without any basis. The 4 agreement in between a Joint Bipartite Committee of Trade Unions in Coal Industry and management of Coal Industries coming under the Government of India, Ministry of Coal. Thus, entire Coal Industries under the Ministry of Coal, Union of India is party to the said agreement. Therefore, the respondent can provide appropriate job looking to the position of the petitioner. Her husband was only a Peon. The petitioner has already taken her decision and she has opted for employment. Reasons given in impugned order dated 30/07/2010 to deny that employment or readiness and willingness shown to extend it to son above 18 years of age is totally irrelevant and invalid ground for denial. Hence, impugned order dated 30/07/2010 is quashed and set aside. Petitioner is found eligible for grant of employment in terms of Clause 9.5.0 (II) of the National Coal Wage Agreement-VI. Respondent shall take appropriate decision for providing her work in accordance with the law at the earliest and in any case within a period of eight weeks’ from the date of communication of this order. Petition is thus partly allowed. No order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE Deshmukh