Banwarilal Sahu v. Union Of India

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 1780 of 2018 Bharat Lal Sahu, S/o Batulal Sahu, aged about 28 years, R/o Village Sukhripali, Post - Gatora, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur (CG) WPS No. 1784 of 2018 Balram Sahu S/o Lokram Sahu, aged about 29 years, R/o Village Sukhripali, Post Gatora, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur (CG)

WPS No. 1785 of 2018 Ganesh Ram Sahu, S/o Atmaram Sahu, aged about 33 years, R/o Village Sukhripali Post Gatora Tahsil Masturi District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh WPS No. 1786 of 2018 Jhaturam Sahu, S/o Late Mahettar Sahu, aged about 39 years, R/o Village Sukhripali Post Gatora Tehsil Masturi District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

WPS No. 1792 of 2018 Banwarilal Sahu, S/o Jailal Sahu, aged about 27 years, R/o VillageSukhripali, Post- Gatora, Tehsil- Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., For Petitioners :

Mr. Rohit Sharma, Advocate.

For Respondents/State :

Mr. B. Gopa Kumar, Dy. Advocate General and Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Advocates for respective respondents.

For Resp - Union of India :

Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, standing counsel.

For Respondent - NTPC :

Mr. B.D. Guru, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board

26/02/18 Heard.

Office objection is over-ruled.

1.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that their land have been acquired for NTPC Seepat Project but employment has not been provided to them either by State or by NTPC, for which they have also made joint representation before respondents No. 2 and 4 but it has not been considered and decided till date.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that the Collector, Bilaspur after discussion with the NTPC has sought instructions from the State on 12.10.2017 but no direction has been issued by the State till date.

3.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. 4.

Be that as it may, the respondent No. 3 - Secretary, General Administrative Department, Raipur is directed to take decision on the Collector's memo dated 12.10.2017 seeking direction expeditiously preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and thereafter, once the decision is taken by the State Government, the Collector will do the needful in accordance with law after hearing the parties within a further period of two months. 5.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petitions stand finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka