Bombay High Court Allows Compassionate Appointment for Married Daughter of Deceased Employee in Coal India Ltd. Case. Rejection on Ground of Marriage Held Discriminatory and Contrary to Precedent.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, including Mrs. Tanuja (married daughter of the deceased employee) and other family members, challenged a communication dated 10/04/2025 issued by respondent No.4 (Western Coalfields Ltd.) rejecting the application for compassionate employment on the ground that the applicant was a married daughter. The High Court of Bombay at Nagpur, in Writ Petition No. 3108 of 2025, heard the matter. The court noted that the issue was no longer res integra, citing the case of Asha Pandey v. Coal India Ltd. (2016 SCC On-Line Chh 2408) and a Division Bench order in Mandakini Vithoba Pole v. Western Coalfields Ltd. (Writ Petition No.3764/2023). The respondents opposed the petition, arguing that the policy framed by WCL did not allow compassionate appointment to married daughters. However, the court found that the rejection was contrary to established precedent and discriminatory. The court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned communication, and directed the respondents to consider the application for compassionate appointment afresh in light of the cited judgments. The court also ordered that the decision be made within four weeks from the date of the order.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Compassionate Appointment - Married Daughter - Entitlement - The court considered whether a married daughter is eligible for compassionate appointment under the Coal India Ltd. policy. The court held that rejection on the ground of marriage is discriminatory and contrary to precedent, relying on Asha Pandey v. Coal India Ltd. and Mandakini Vithoba Pole v. Western Coalfields Ltd. (Paras 3-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a married daughter is entitled to compassionate appointment under the Coal India Ltd. policy, and whether rejection on the ground of marriage is valid.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is allowed. The impugned communication dated 10/04/2025 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the application for compassionate appointment afresh in light of the judgments in Asha Pandey and Mandakini Vithoba Pole, and pass a reasoned order within four weeks.

Law Points

  • Compassionate appointment
  • married daughter
  • discrimination
  • policy interpretation
  • precedent binding
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (BOM) (07) 176

Writ Petition No. 3108 of 2025

2026-07-13

Y. G. Khobragade, Sushil M. Ghodeswar

2026:BHC-NAG:8826-DB

Shri S. M. Bhangde for petitioners, Shri Pushkar Ghare for respondent Nos.2 to 4

Mrs. Tanuja w/o Amol Zade, Smt. Savita wd/o Kawdu Wanshinge, Mrs. Kiran w/o Prashant Chakravarty, Ganesh s/o Kawdu Wanshinge

Coal India Ltd., Western Coalfields Ltd., Area General Manager, Western Coalfields Ltd., Manager (Personal), Western Coalfields Ltd.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging rejection of compassionate appointment application.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of communication dated 10/04/2025 and direction to grant compassionate appointment.

Filing Reason

Rejection of application for compassionate employment on ground that applicant is married daughter.

Issues

Whether married daughter is entitled to compassionate appointment under Coal India Ltd. policy.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners: Rejection is discriminatory and contrary to precedent. Respondents: Policy does not allow compassionate appointment to married daughters.

Ratio Decidendi

Married daughter cannot be denied compassionate appointment solely on ground of marriage; such rejection is discriminatory and contrary to precedent.

Judgment Excerpts

The issue involved in the present petition is no more res integra as per case of Asha Pandey Vrs. Coal India Ltd. and others, 2016 SCC On-Line Chh 2408 as well as the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.3764/2023 (Mandakini Vithoba Pole and another Vrs. Chief Managing Director, Western Coalfields Limited, Nagpur and others).

Procedural History

Petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 3108 of 2025 challenging communication dated 10/04/2025 rejecting compassionate appointment application. Rule was issued and matter taken up for final disposal at admission stage with consent.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Allows Insurance Company's Appeals in Motor Accident Claims Cases — Reduces Compensation Due to Lack of Proof of Income and Negligence. The court held that in the absence of evidence of income and negligence, the compensatio...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeals in Property Dispute, Upholds Concurrent Findings of Fact. Court holds that no substantial question of law arises under Section 100 CPC when findings are based on appreciation of evidence and not perverse.