{"id":271414,"date":"2010-08-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010"},"modified":"2016-01-10T02:55:03","modified_gmt":"2016-01-09T21:25:03","slug":"kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Kaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madhya Pradesh High Court<\/div>\n
Kaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010<\/div>\n
                      W.P.NO.5976\/2004\n\n25.8.2010\n\n      Shri R.S. Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner.\n\n      Shri Anoop Nair, learned counsel for respondents.<\/pre>\n
      With the consent, the petition is heard finally.
\n      Grievance put-forth by the petitioner in this Writ Petition
\nunder Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution of India is against the
\norder dated 15.1.2004; whereby, the claim of the petitioner for
\ngrant of compassionate appointment in lieu of the death of her
\nhusband has been negatived on the ground that the petitioner is
\nsanctioned monetary compensation.\n<\/p>\n
      Husband of the petitioner was employed as Tub-loader in
\nNandan Mine No. 1, Western Coal Fields Ltd.              He died on
\n20.10.1997 leaving behind the petitioner and a son and two
\ndaughters.\n<\/p>\n
      That, in pursuance to National Coal Wage Agreement V,
\nan advise was tendered to the petitioner that, her son who was
\naged 16 years will be placed in live roaster and on completion of
\n18 years, he will be given the compassionate appointment, till
\nthen the petitioner was offered Rs.2000\/- per month as
\nmonetary compensation. The advise was tendered on the basis
\nof the letter No. 22\/98\/594 dt. 11.5.1996, which was in
\npursuance to the application by the petitioner for appointment
\non compassionate ground. The petitioner declined the offer vide
\nher letter dt. 20.5.1998 (Annexure R\/2) whereby the petitioner
\nstated that she wants to educate her son.          The petitioner;
\nhowever, expressed that she is interested in the appointment on
\ncompassionate ground.     The respondents though did not offer
\n                                       2<\/span><\/p>\n
any job to the petitioner but as evident from the averment in the
\nreturn, the petitioner was paid monetary compensation w.e.f.
\n10.5.1998     to    9.5.2004   @     Rs.2500\/-       from    10.5.1998      to
\n9.11.1999 and Rs.3000\/- from 12.11.99 to 9.5.04.                          This
\nmonetary      compensation      was       accorded    vide     order   dated
\n11.5.1998. Later on the son of the petitioner when crossed 18
\nyears    of   age   the    petitioner     reminded     her     request     for
\ncompassionate appointment.           The same was, however, turned
\ndown on the ground that it is not permissible when the
\npetitioner has once declined to accept, the offer of appointment
\nto her son and having been granted the monetary compensation.\n<\/p>\n
        The petitioner is aggrieved of the denial of the claim for
\ncompassionate appointment.\n<\/p>\n
        It is urged that, the authorities concerned have misguided
\nthemselves by holding that the petitioner declined to accept the
\noffer. It is contended that the petitioner was never given an offer
\nof appointment. Instead, on an application by the petitioner, the
\noffer was made for appointment of the son and the petitioner
\nsince    wanted     to    educate    her    son,     offered    herself    for
\nappointment. It is further contended that the respondents are
\nnot justified in rejecting the claim of the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
        The respondents on the other hand have justified their
\naction in rejecting the request of the petitioner for employment
\non compassionate ground.           It is urged that the petitioner was
\ngranted monetary compensation and, therefore, she was not
\nprovided the compassionate appointment.\n<\/p>\n
        The Scheme of Compassionate appointment is contained
\nin clause 9.5.0 of the NCWA V, which provides for:\n<\/p>\n
     “9.5.0: Employment\/monetary compensation to female
\n     dependant.\n<\/p>\n
                            3<\/span><\/p>\n
Provision of employment\/monetary compensation to
\nfemale dependants of workmen who die while in
\nservice and who are declared medically unfit as per
\nClause 9.4.0 above would be regulated as under:\n<\/p>\n
(i) In case of death due to mine accident, the female
\ndependant would have the option to either accept the
\nmonetary compensation of Rs.3,000\/- per month or
\nemployment irrespective of her age.\n<\/p>\n
(ii) In case of death\/total permanent disablement due
\nto causes other than mine accident and medical
\nunfitness under Clause 9.4.0., if the female dependant
\nis below the age of 45 years she will have the option
\neither to accept the monetary compensation of
\nRs.2,000\/- per month or employment.\n<\/p>\n
In case the female dependant is above 45 years of age
\nshe will be entitled only to monetary compensation
\nand not to employment.\n<\/p>\n
(iii) In case of death either in mine accident or for
\nother reasons or medical unfitness under Clause
\n9.4.0, if no employment has been offered and the male
\ndependant of the concerned worker is 15 years and
\nabove in age, he will be kept on a live roster and would
\nbe provided employment commensurate with his skill
\nand qualifications when he attains the age of 18 years.
\nDuring the period the male dependant is on live roster,
\nthe female dependant will be paid monetary
\ncompensation as per rates at paras (i) and (ii) above.\n<\/p>\n
(iv) Monetary compensation wherever applicable,
\nwould be paid till the female dependant attains the age
\nof 60 years.\n<\/p>\n
(v) the rate of monetary compensation which stands at
\nRs.2000\/- and Rs.3000\/- per month as mentioned
\nabove would be reviewed w.e.f. 01.07.1996.\n<\/p>\n
                                  4<\/span><\/p>\n
    (vi)   The rate of monetary compensation will be
\n    reviewed as and when new wage agreements are
\n    finalized.\n<\/p>\n
    Note. In the case of TISCO, the matter would be settled
\n    at bipartite level.\n<\/p>\n
    This would supersede all past agreements, circulars
\n    and instructions issued on the subject in so far as the
\n    issues are covered by the provisions, herein above.”\n<\/p>\n
      Letter dated 11.5.1998 on the basis whereof the proposal
\ndated 19.5.1998 communicated to the petitioner, it was stated
\nin clear terms that as per the stipulation in clause 9.5.0 (iii)
\nNCWA-V the name of the petitioner’s son would be kept on live
\nroster till 18 years and till then the petitioner would be given
\nRs.2000\/- towards monetary compensation and proposal for
\nemployment of petitioner’s son would be sent to headquarters
\nonce he completes 18 years of age. It was said :\n<\/p>\n
    vr% ,u-lh-MCY;w-&5 dh \/kkjk 9-5-0&III ds vuqlkj muds
\n    18 o”kZ dh vk;q ds gksus rd e`rd dh vkfJrk ifRu
\n    Jherh dkS’kY;k dks 2]000@& :I;s ekWusVjh dEiUls’ku ysus
\n    gsrq le>k;k tk, muls fyf[kr lgefr izkIr dh tk;s]
\n    e`rd ds iq= ‘ke’ksj dh vk;q 18 o”kZ gksus ij mDr
\n    jkstxkj iznku djus gsrq izLrko daiuh eq[;ky; Hkstk tk;sA”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      The aforesaid decision was thus in consonance with the
\nprovision 9.5.0 (iii) which aims at preserving right of male
\ndependent for an employment on a compassionate ground and a
\nmonetary compensation to female dependant will not hamper
\nsuch a right.      Having taken such decision it was incumbent
\nupon the respondents to have offered an employment in terms of
\nletter dated 11.5.1998 to the petitioner’s son on his attaining the
\nage of 18 years.\n<\/p>\n
                                5<\/span><\/p>\n
       The stand of the respondents as is reflected vide
\ncommunication dated 15.1.2004 that because the petitioner has
\naccepted the monetary compensation and, therefore, the male
\ndependent will not be entitled for compassionate appointment,
\nbesides being contrary to the decision dt. 11.5.1998, is also not
\nin commensurate with the NCWA-IV
\n      The effect of clause 9.5.0 of NCWA V was noted in the
\nfollowing terms in Mohan Mahto v. Central Coal Fields Ltd<\/a>.
\n(2007) 8 SCC 549 wherein it was observed by their Lordships:\n<\/p>\n
    “17. It is neither in doubt nor in dispute that the case
\n    for grant of compassionate appointment of a minor
\n    was required to be considered in terms of sub-clause\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    (iii) of Clause 9.5.0 of the N.C.W.A.V. In terms of the
\n    said provision, the name of the appellant was to be
\n    kept on a live roster. He was to remain on the live
\n    roster till he attained the age of 18 years. Respondents
\n    did not perform their duties cast on them thereunder.
\n    It took an unilateral stand that an application has
\n    been filed in the year 1999 in the prescribed form. For
\n    complying with the provisions of a settlement which is
\n    binding on the parties, bona fide or otherwise of the
\n    respondent must be judged from the fact as to whether
\n    it had discharged his duties thereunder or not. In this
\n    case, not only it failed and\/or neglected to do so, but
\n    as indicated hereinbefore it took an unholy stand that
\n    the elder brother of the appellant being employed, he
\n    was not entitled to appointment on the compassionate
\n    ground. Thus, what really impelled the respondent in
\n    denying the benefit of compassionate appointment to
\n    the appellant is, therefore, open to guess. We expect a
\n    public sector undertaking which is a ‘State’ within the
\n    meaning of Article 12<\/a> of the Constitution of India not
\n    only to act fairly but also reasonably and bona fide. In
\n    this case, we are satisfied that the action of the
\n    respondent is neither fair nor reasonable nor bona
\n    fide.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    18. We have indicated hereinbefore, that it is not
\n    necessary for us to go into the question as to whether
\n    on the teeth of the provision of N.C.W.A.V., the
\n                                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
    respondent at all had any power to fix a time limit and
\n    thereby curtailing the right of the workman concerned.
\n    We would assume that even in such a matter, it had a
\n    right. But, even for the said purpose, keeping in view
\n    the fact that a beneficial provision is made under a
\n    settlement, the ‘State’ was expected to act reasonably.
\n    While so acting, it must provide for a period of
\n    limitation which is reasonable. Apart from the fact that
\n    the period of limitation provided for in the circular
\n    letter with a power of relaxation can never be held to
\n    be imperative in character, the matter should also be
\n    considered from the subsequent conduct of the
\n    respondent insofar as it had issued another circular
\n    letter in the year 2000 providing for filing of an
\n    application for appointment on compassionate ground
\n    within a period of one year. It may be that the said
\n    circular letter has prospective operation but even in
\n    relation thereto we may notice that whereas the said
\n    circular letter was issued upon holding discussion
\n    with the Unions, the circular letter of the year 1995
\n    was an unilateral one. Furthermore, in its letter dated
\n    2\/3.08.2000, it will bear repetition to state, expiry of
\n    the period of limitation was not taken as a ground for
\n    rejecting his application. Under-age and non-
\n    placement of his name in live roster are stated to be
\n    the reasons. It is, therefore, unfair on the part of the
\n    respondent to raise such a plea for the first time in its
\n    counter-affidavit to the writ petition. If he was under-
\n    age, definitely, it was obligatory on the part of the
\n    respondent to keep his name in the live roster. It was
\n    not done.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    The contention put forth by the respondents that since the
\npetitioner   accepted   monetary    compensation     in   lieu   of
\nemployment when adjudged on the touchstone of provisions
\ncontained in clause 9.5.0 of NCWA V and letter dated 11.5.1998
\nleaves no iota of doubt that the monetary compensation to the
\npetitioner was as per the terms and condition of NCWA V and
\nnot at the mercy of the respondents. And since the decision was
\ntaken by the respondent in consonance with clause 9.5.0 (iii);\n<\/p>\n
                                                  7<\/span><\/p>\n
                 incumbent it was upon them to have offered the job to male
\n                 dependant, i.e., son of the petitioner on his attaining 18 years.
\n                 The respondents are thus not justified in acting in contravention
\n                 to the stipulations of NCWA V and to the detriment of the
\n                 welfare of the petitioner.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                     In view of above decision, not granting employment to the
\n                 petitioner’s son is not sustainable. The respondents within two
\n                 months from the date of communication of this order shall
\n                 provide the benefit of appointment on compassionate ground to
\n                 the petitioner’s son as per the NCWA V.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                     In the result the petition is allowed to the extent above.
\n                 However no costs.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                                           (SANJAY YADAV)
\n                                                              J U D G E
\nVivek Tripathi\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madhya Pradesh High Court Kaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010 W.P.NO.5976\/2004 25.8.2010 Shri R.S. Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Anoop Nair, learned counsel for respondents. With the consent, the petition is heard finally. Grievance put-forth by the petitioner in this Writ Petition under Article 226 of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,24],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-271414","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madhya-pradesh-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nKaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-08-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-09T21:25:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-09T21:25:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1880,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madhya Pradesh High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Kaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-09T21:25:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Kaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-09T21:25:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-09T21:25:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010"},"wordCount":1880,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madhya Pradesh High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010","name":"Kaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-09T21:25:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kaushlya-bai-vs-the-western-coalfields-ltd-ors-on-25-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kaushlya Bai vs The Western Coalfields Ltd. & Ors on 25 August, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271414","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=271414"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271414\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=271414"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=271414"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=271414"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}