Rattho Bai’s victory paves way for several women who were denied employment

This is a relatively old brief, but I missed posting here; I beleive atleast 500 women have now found work in CIL

Rattho Bai’s family lost land admeasuring 0.200 hectare which was acquired by the government for the benefit of South Eastern Coal Fields Limited (SECL) for carrying out mining activity, as the land was coal bearing area in Chaal village of Raigarh District Chhattisgarh.  Notification for acquisition under the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 was issued on 24.09.2004 and the award was passed on 02.06.2005. In absence of any male member in the family, Rattho Bai applied for employment under the extant Rehabilitation Policy of the State Government. The claim was refused on the ground that the petitioner being a woman is not eligible for employment in terms of Clause (VIII) K (b) of the Uniform Guideline for employment to Land Looser, issued by the SECL on 8/13-8-2002. After several efforts to seek redressal from the company in vain, Rattho Bai decided to go to the court. The high court, after several hearings ultimately provided justice to her. This has paved way for several women and current over 200 are likely to have been benefitted. In the course of the judgement the court observed “ It is apt to note here that reservation of seats for women in panchayats and municipalities have been provided under Articles 243(d) and 243(t) of the Constitution of India. The purpose of the constitutional amendment is that the women in India are required to participate more in a democratic set-up especially at the grass root level. This is an affirmative step in the realm of women empowerment. The 73rd and 74th Amendments of the Constitution which deal with the reservation of women has the avowed purpose, that is, the women should become parties in the decision-making process in a democracy that is governed by the rule of law.”

 The court went on to further state “Their active participation in the decision-making process has been accentuated upon and the secondary role which was historically given to women has been sought to be metamorphosed to the primary one. The sustenance of gender justice is the cultivated achievement of intrinsic human rights. Equality cannot be achieved unless there are equal opportunities and if a woman is debarred at the threshold to enter into the sphere of profession for which she is eligible and qualified, it is well-nigh impossible to conceive of equality. It also clips her capacity to earn her livelihood which affects her individual dignity.”

 

SECL has otherwise appointed several women candidates in its establishment.  SECL would explain that the lady candidates mentioned in the said document have been appointed on compassionate ground. The court held that the source or manner of appointment is not a criterion for denying appointment to others. If a woman candidate can be employed on compassionate ground, a person whose entire agricultural land has been acquired is also entitled for appointment. As a matter of principle, right to get appointment in lieu of acquisition of land is not a lesser right than the right to get compassionate appointment in the event of death of a government servant. In the case of land oustee also, there is loss of means of livelihood and more so, when the entire agricultural land has been acquired.