← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/3577/2016dismissed

Diwakar Kewat v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-08-10Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3577 of 2016 Diwakar Kewat S/o Narayan Prasad Kewat, Aged About 23 Years R/o. Village Kurda, P. S. Champa, District Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through : The Secretary, Human Resources Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. Collector, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

3. Sub Divisional Officer, Revenue, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

4. Chief Engineer, ( Civil Project) Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Limited, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

5. The Superintending Engineer, Civil Circle 1, 2x500 MW, Madva Tendubhata Thermal Power Project, Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Limited, Janjgir District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

6. The Executive Engineer, Civil Land Acquisition Division, 2x500 M.W. Madva Tendubhata Thermal Power Project, Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Limited, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents Shri N.K.Chatterjee, counsel for the petitioner/s. Shri Dhiraj Wankhede, Govt. Advocate for the State. Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 10/08/2016 This petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of direction to the respondent / company to grant him employment in lieu of acquisition of land as per rehabilitation policy.

2.

The petitioner has earlier filed a petition seeking the same relief and the same was disposed off with a direction to the respondents to consider his claim. Vide order dated 22/06/2016 (Annexure P/2), the petitioner has been held

entitled for consideration of alternative employment and he has been asked to submit application.

3.

Without submitting any application, the petitioner has filed this petition. The petition, if I may say so, is utterly misconceived and frivolous. The petitioner should have first submitted an application for grant of alternative employment as offered to him. It is not a case where despite submitting application, the offer is not being acted upon.

4.

With the liberty to apply as per offer dated 22/06/2016, this petition is dismissed.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Deepti