Ravindra Nath Singh v. The Union Of India And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16760 of 2016 =========================================================== Ravindra Nath Singh, Son of Late Ramprit Singh, R/o Mahavir Tola (Chulhaichack), P.O.- Shaya Nagar, P.S.- Rupaspur, District- Patna, Pincode801506. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through Secretary, Department of Railway, Railway Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. Secretary, Department of Railway, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi.
3. The Union of India through the General Manager, East Central Railway, Ministry of Railway, Vaishali at Hajipur.
4. The D.R.M. East Central Railway, Ministry of Railway, Danapur, Patna.
5. The Chief Engineer, Construction, Ganga Bridge, East Central Railway, Digha Ghat, Patna.
6. The Dy. Chief Engineer, Construction, East Central Railway, Digha Ghat, Patna.
7. The State of Bihar, through the Secretary and Commissioner, Revenue & Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
8. The District Magistrate cum Collector, Patna.
9. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Arun Kumar Bhagat, A.C. to A.A.G. XII.
For the Railway :
Mr. Madhuresh Prasad, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 09-02-2017
2/4 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, State and the Railways.
The petitioner has moved the Court seeking a direction to the respondents to implement their policy of providing a job to the persons whose lands has been acquired for the purposes of constructing railway bridge over the river Ganga at Rupaspur in the District of Patna.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that under the policy of the Railways, such persons are to be given priority in employment and in fact, persons whose land have been acquired on the northern side of the Ganga, in the district of Saran have been given such benefit, whereas the petitioner who is resident of the sourthern side of the Ganga, in the district of Patna, despite having represented before the District Magistrate, Patna for forwarding his application to the Railways, no action has been taken, causing prejudice to him. Learned counsel submitted that the entire land, on which there was a house standing, has been acquired for the purposes of the bridge by the Railways through the district authorities, which is not in dispute and as per the policy, one member from each family was required to be provided employment by the Railways which has still not been done.
Learned counsel for the Railways pointed out that
3/4 as per the averments made in the writ petition the application has to be forwarded through the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Patna and it has been stated that the same is still pending at that stage. He submitted that only upon the matter being referred by the Collectorcum-District Magistrate, Patna, the Railways would consider the request in accordance with law and in terms of the relevant policies. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Patna (respondent no. 8) would finally decide the representation filed by the petitioner expeditiously and accordingly transmit his recommendation to the Railways. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed off with a direction to the respondent no.
8 to take a final decision with regard to the representation of the petitioner for providing employment, either to himself or to his son, under the policy of the Railways. To facilitate the matter, the petitioner shall make a fresh representation to the respondent no. 8 within two weeks from today, along with a copy of this order, whereupon the respondent no. 8 shall make his proper comments/recommendations and forward the same to the respondent no. 4 within six weeks thereafter. The respondent no. 4 shall then take a decision, either himself or shall place the matter before the Competent Authority for taking a final decision.
4/4 from the date of receipt of the report from the respondent no. 8. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) Anand Kr.
AFR/NAFR U