Fulkunwar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 1576 OF 2015 • Fulkunwar, D/o Late Goutiya, aged about 42 years, by caste- Panika, R/o Gharghoda, Tahsil Gharghoda, P.S. Gharghoda, Civil and Revenue District Raigarh (CG) ... Petitioner versus 1.

State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) 2.

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, through its Managing Director, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG) 3.

Collector, Raigarh, District Raigarh (CG) 4.

Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Gharghoda, District Raigarh (CG) 5.

Superintendent of Police, Raigarh, District Raigarh (CG) 6.

Regional Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Jampali, District Raigarh (CG) ... Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Mr. V.R. Tiwari, Addl. Advocate General.

For Respondent-SECL :

Mr. R.K. Gupta, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 22/01/2020 1.

Claim of the petitioner in the present writ petition was for a direction to the respondent-SECL for providing compensation for the land belonging to the petitioner which has been acquired by the respondent-SECL for mining purpose. 2.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the land situates at Khasra No. 516/3 admeasuring 1.012 hectares. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly concedes that the petitioner has not received compensation on account of certain family dispute that they had over the property which stood acquired and that the said dispute now stands resolved. However, the petitioner has till date not received the compensation part. Further grievance of the petitioner is that under the policy the land loosers were also entitled for employment with the SECL, which too has not been provided either to the petitioner or any of her family members.

3.

Learned counsel for the respondent-SECL at this juncture submits that they have already filed a reply stating that the entire compensation as awarded by the authorities has already been deposited with the concerned Sub Divisional

Officer and the said amount also has further been received by the persons in whose name the land stood recorded at the time of acquisition and therefore no liability any further for payment of compensation by the SECL to the petitioner exists and, if at all, if the petitioner is entitled for any claim the same has to be settled between the petitioner and her family members who have received the compensation.

4.

So far as the issue of granting employment is concerned, learned counsel for the respondent-SECL submits that in view of the family dispute the claim of the petitioner cannot be resolved and, in case, the dispute stands resolved, any person claiming employment against the said piece of land may approach the management of SECL supported with all relevant documents and the same shall be duly considered and decided at the earliest. 5.

Given the said submissions of the learned counsel for the respondentSECL, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition petition itself can be and is disposed of at this juncture, with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the management of SECL by making a suitable application supported with all relevant documents so far as her entitlement for employment with the SECL is concerned and the management of SECL i.e., respondents no. 2 and 6, shall at the earliest consider and decide the same, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the application of the petitioner. As regards the dispute of compensation is concerned, the liberty would be reserved with the petitioner to avail the same by taking appropriate steps for settling the dispute between the petitioner and her other family members who have received the entire compensation amount.

6.

The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ JUDGE