Madhya Pradesh High Court
Gaurav Kumar vs Northern Coal Field Ltd. on 7 January, 2025
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:482
1 WP-13323-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 7 th OF JANUARY, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 13323 of 2023
GAURAV KUMAR AND OTHERS
Versus
NORTHERN COAL FIELD LTD. AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Aditya Ahiwasi, Advocate for Petitioners.
Shri Greeshm Jain, Advocate for Respondents.
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioners is referring to Annexure P/2. When Annexure P/2 is sought to be opened then the screen reflects that "an error occurred while loading the document. Try reloading the page".
Thus, Annexure P/2 is not openable, which results in wastage of time of the Court.
Information & Technology Section be put to task. An enquiry be conducted and explanation be taken from the delinquent/delinquents that why Annexure P/2 is not loading and openable on the screen and the report be submitted in the Chamber within three days.
At this stage, Shri Iqbal Ahemd, Data Entry Operator attached with this Court submits that Annexure P/2 is openable in the system, which is available to the lawyer.
However, it is not expected of the Court to move towards the side of the lawyer and look into the system. The document should have opened in Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 1/9/2025 6:54:36 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:482 2 WP-13323-2023 the system, which is given to the Court to be used by the concerned High Court Judge and the High Court Judge is not expected to go and look into the system meant for the lawyers and, therefore, the submission of Shri Iqbal Ahmed that it is opening in the system available to the lawyer, is of no substance.
The physical file is reluctantly taken up for consideration. Petitioners have filed this petition being aggrieved of the action of the respondents in denying them appointment vide order Annexure P/1 dated 2.6.2023 on the post of Mining Sirdar T&S Grade-C only on the ground that the certificate, which is possessed by the petitioners, is a restricted certificate limited to opencast workings only and they have not given appointment to anybody, who is not eligible to work in an underground mine.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that firstly in the advertisement, no such condition is prescribed and secondly the syllabus, which is given by the Northern Coalfields Limited as is enclosed alongwith Annexure P/2 reads as under:-
"Section-A (1-70 questions, MCQ of one mark each) 70 Marks.
1.Opencast coal mine working; bench formation, dump management and haul road design.
2. Shot firing and transport and use of explosives in mines.
3. Safety issues in opencast workings, transport of material, working at heights, marching and deployment of Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 1/9/2025 6:54:36 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:482
3 WP-13323-2023 heavy machines etc.
4. Preliminary idea about reclamation operation in opencast mining.
5. Preliminary understanding about safety management plan.
6. Provisions of the Coal Mines Regulations, 2017, Rules and Bye-Laws made under the Mines Act, 1952 relating to the safety of persons employed in Mines in general and to the duties of Sirdars and Shofirer's in particular.
7. Writing of reports.
Etc.as per the courses offered by the Recognized Institutes."
It is evident that even the syllabus, which was prescribed contained the provisions for opencast coal mine workings bench formation etc and, therefore, the contention of the respondents is devoid of merit.
Learned counsel for the respondents in his turn submits that they have not recruited any person, who is not having qualification to work in an underground mine. In the recruitment rule itself, there is a provision and, therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to any indulgence.
This Court vide order dated 26.4.2024 had recorded contentions of the rival parties, which are as under:-
''Herein controversy is that an advertisement was issued for appointment of Mining Sirdar. Petitioners Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 1/9/2025 6:54:36 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:482 4 WP-13323-2023 possess a certificate Annexure P-6, namely, the Overman Certificate of competency issued by the Board of Mining Examination.
Respondent's contention is that petitioners have not been given appointment because their Overman Certificate of competency is a restricted certificate limited to open cast workings only.
It is submitted by Shri Greeshm Jain that respondents required persons to work in open cast as well as Underground Mines and the positions are interchangeable, therefore, petitioners have not been given appointment.
Petitioners' contention is that when advertisement, Annexure P-2, was issued, it provides for qualification and qualification is available on page No.22 reads 'valid Overman Certificate of competency issued by DGMS under Coal Mines Regulation, 2017 or any other certificate in Mining which entitle the applicant to work as Mining Sirdar as per Coal Mines Regulation, 2017.
Petitioners' contention is that the date of advertisement is 27.11.2022. There was no prescription of restricted or unrestricted Overman Certificate and, therefore, now after the selection is complete, Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 1/9/2025 6:54:36 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:482 5 WP-13323-2023 petitioners cannot be ousted.
Learned counsel for the respondents in his turn submits that Annexure R-1 is the application form of one of the petitioners and Annexure R-2 is the copy of the Recruitment Rules which provides that Mining Sirdar is a Technical and Support Grade-C Staff and the qualification prescribed for the post is valid certificates of Mining Sirdarship, First Aid and Gas Testing and experience is three years of experience of working in Underground Mines.
It is thus submitted that when the Recruitment Rules itself provides for three years experience of working in Underground Mines, petitioners are not entitled to be given appointment.
However, fact of the matter is that Annexure R-4 is the certificate of competency examination conducted by the Board of Mining Examinations and in this qualification for Overman Certificate has been categorized in two categories, unrestricted under the Coal Mines Regulation, 2017 and restricted under the Coal Mines Regulation, 2017.
Thus, when Coal Mines Regulation, 2017, itself provides for two kinds of certificates, unrestricted and restricted, then it was for the employer that while Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 1/9/2025 6:54:36 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:482 6 WP-13323-2023 issuing the advertisement they should have mentioned that only persons having Overman Certificate (Unrestricted) under the Coal Mines Regulation, 2017 will be eligible for appointment. Thus, for the fault of the person who issued the advertisement, petitioners can prima facie be not to put to disadvantage.
Thus, there are only two courses open either the whole advertisement is cancelled and all the appointments made thereunder be set aside or respondents take a call that those candidates who had successfully competed be given suitable appointment.
In this behalf, let the General Manager, Northern Coalfields Limited (A Miniratna Company) Post Singrauli Colliery, District Singrauli file his personal affidavit that why for the fault of the NCL, petitioners should be made to suffer and whether they are willing to accommodate the petitioners or not.
Let affidavit be filed within four weeks.
List in the week commencing 27.05.2024.'' A perusal of the said order and the syllabus enclosed by the petitioners as Annexure P/2 clearly reveal that there is no prescription for possessing a certificate to work in an underground mine. Even the syllabus itself provides for the subject dealing with opencast coal mine working. Thus, the submission made by learned counsel for the respondents in view of the Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 1/9/2025 6:54:36 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:482 7 WP-13323-2023 syllabus prescribed under Annexure P/2 for the said recruitment, which is not disputed by learned counsel for the respondents makes it abundantly clear that the respondents are now trying to change their position and trying to avoid giving appointment to the petitioners only on the basis of a misplaced understanding of fact that the recruitment was to be made only for those having qualification to work in an underground mine. There is no prescription for having experience or certificate to work in an underground mine and all the topics are generally concerned with the opencast mining and, therefore, the submission of learned counsel for the respondents being contrary to the syllabus (Annexure P/2) cannot be given a seal of approval. The decision of the respondents to not to give appointment to the petitioners merely because they had produced a certificate of experience for opencast mining is not justified. The impugned order is set aside. The respondents are directed to give appointment to the petitioners in order of their merit and seniority within a period of thirty days from today.
Learned counsel for the respondents at this stage submits that they had mentioned in the advertisement that the person may be required to work in any kind of the mines.
The aforesaid submission made by learned counsel for the respondents is denied by learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the advertisement says that a person selected can be posted in any of the mines of the Northern Coalfields Limited or is liable to be transferred to any of the subsidiaries of the Coal India Limited but it does not make a mention of the fact that he is required to work even in an Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 1/9/2025 6:54:36 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:482 8 WP-13323-2023 underground mine.
Even otherwise, the advertisement is not categorical saying that the recruitment is being made for underground mine. Another fact as discussed above is that even the syllabus is with regard to opencast mine and not with regard to underground mine. The aforesaid stand by learned counsel for the respondents is contrary to the syllabus and the documents available on record and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.
Hence, the cost of litigation will be borne by the Northern Coalfields Limited, which is quantified at Rs.25,000/-.
The cost will be apportioned amongst the petitioners in equal proportion.
In above terms, this writ petition is allowed and disposed of.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE amit Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 1/9/2025 6:54:36 PM