Calcutta High Court
Smt. Santi Ruidas vs Coal India Limited & Ors on 5 August, 2008
ORDER SHEET
W.P. No.1262 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
ORIGINAL SIDE
SMT. SANTI RUIDAS.
-Versus-
COAL INDIA LIMITED & ORS.
Mr. Subrata Ganguly, Advocate,
... for the writ petitioner.
Mr. Susanta Pal with Mr. P. Basu & Mr. N. Roy,
Advocates,
... for the respondents.
Before The Hon'ble Justice SAILENDRA PRASAD TALUKDAR 05.08.2008 Grievance of the writ petitioner relates to alleged painful inaction on the part of the respondent authority in considering the claim of the writ petitioner for appointment under the National Coal Wages Agreement.
Mr. Ganguly, learned Counsel for the writ petitioner, submits that the writ petitioner is the dependent of the deceased employee and is entitled to get such appointment. It is further mentioned that the writ petitioner has taken all possible steps in this regard. His application was duly processed and forwarded by the concerned office. But it is alleged that the authority concerned continues to suffer from painful inertia of inaction.
Learned Counsel for the respondent authority submits that the claim of the writ petitioner is hopelessly barred by time, since the writ petitioner chose to remain indifferent to the claim for a protracted period of time.
2
It is not understood as to how this, by itself, could throw the writ petitioner out of this Court. It appears further from the materials available on record that the writ petitioner submitted the representation and this was followed up by other approaches. There is no change in complexion so far. This is quite unfortunate. In the circumstances and in the best interest of justice, the writ application is disposed of with the following directions :
The writ petitioner is directed to submit a fresh representation annexing thereto a copy of the writ application along with its annexures before the respondent no.5 herein, within 2nd September, 2008. The said respondent no.5, upon receipt of the same, must consider the matter in its proper perspective and must take appropriate action or pass necessary order in accordance with the rules - preferably after giving the writ petitioner an opportunity of hearing. The entire process must be completed within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the said representation.
Action to be so taken or order to be so passed, must duly be communicated to the writ petitioner within a further period of three weeks.
There will be no order as to costs.
Since no affidavit-in-opposition is filed, allegations/averments made in the writ petition, are deemed not to have been admitted.
Urgent certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(SAILENDRA PRASAD TALUKDAR, J.) K.Banerjee R.O.(Ct.)