Raipur: Chhattisgarh high court has ruled that the illegitimate son of a deceased govt employee is entitled to be considered for compassionate employment, overturning a decision by South Eastern Coalfields Ltd (SECL).
The single bench of Justice Sanjay K Agrawal set aside SECL’s April 2015 order, which rejected the petitioner’s application on the grounds of illegitimacy, and directed it to process the petitioner’s claim for dependent employment within 45 days.
The case has a complex history. Muniram Kurre, the deceased, had two wives: Sushila Kurre and Vimla Kurre. After his death, Vimla, along with her four daughters and son (petitioner Vikrant Kumar), filed an application under Section 372 of Indian Succession Act, 1925, for a succession certificate, which was granted in their favour. Sushila then filed an application for revocation of the succession certificate but withdrew it after a compromise was reached.
In 2015, SECL rejected Vikrant’s claim for dependent employment. His mother, Vimla Kurre, filed a writ petition, seeking a job for him. The court disposed of the petition by ordering the respondents to decide on her application. Vikrant then moved HC, challenging SECL’s rejection of his application for dependent employment.
His counsel, Sandeep Dubey, argued that since the Succession Court had already recognized the petitioner as the son of Muniram Kurre, SECL should not have rejected his application for dependent employment.
The SECL counsel contended that Vikrant was not entitled to benefits as he was born out of Muniram Kurre’s second marriage, which occurred when he was still married to Sushila.
It was mentioned that Sushila had left Muniram a year and a half after their marriage, leaving behind a daughter from their union. Muniram later married Vimla, with whom he had four children, said the petitioner’s counsel.
After hearing both sides and reviewing the submissions and records, HC observed that the Succession Court’s order, which declared Vimla Kurre as the wife of Muniram Kurre and the petitioner as his son, was “final and binding on the respondents”.
The court relied on Supreme Court’s judgments, which held that a child born out of a second marriage is still a legitimate child and is entitled to compassionate appointment. The court noted that the purpose of compassionate appointment is to prevent destitution and hardship in the family of a deceased employee. “Once Section 16 of Hindu Marriage Act regards a child born from a marriage entered into while an earlier marriage is subsisting as legitimate, it would not be open to the state, consistent with Article 14, to exclude such a child from seeking the benefit of compassionate appointment,” the HC said.