The Supreme Court Bench comprising of Justices D Y Chandrachud, KM Joseph and Indu Malhotra upheld the decision of Calcutta High Court, ordering the Bharat Coking Coal limited to grant a compassionate appointment to a wife of a former employee who had been abducted in 1999 and never been heard of since during a theft at the company premises. The Calcutta High Court had correctly applied the provisions of Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Under Section 108, when it is proved that a man alive or dead has not been heard of or seen by those who normally would have if he were alive, the burden to prove otherwise shifts to the person who affirms it. The man in this case had not been heard of or seen by anyone for 20 years so the court saw no reason to accept the Special Leave Petition.
The Calcutta High Court (Court of 1stinstance) observed from the police investigation report that the man who defended the company from the people who had come to rob them and when they failed, they abducted him, murdered him and then concealed the body. Thus the Court ordered Bharat Coking Coal Limited to offer one of the successors employement in the company.
The decision was challenged and appeal was heard by a division bench of the High Court after a 6 years delay, but was dismissed. BCCL then moved the apex court which refused to interfere with the judgement of the High Court.
"We direct that the petitioner shall comply with the order of the learned Single Judge, within a period of one month from today. The petitioner shall also pay costs quantified at Rs 2 lakhs to the widow of the deceased.”
-Supreme Court
The Court further ordered the company to compensate the family for the hardships that they have faced in the past 20 years caused due to this deferment.
86540
103860
630
114
59824