Govind Manjhi v. Union Of India

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 3304 of 2021

1. Govind Manjhi S/o Sukul Manjhi Aged About 42 Years,

2. Jagat Ram Manjhi S/o Malik Ram Majhi Aged About 52 Years (In The Compensation Chart Petitioners Fathers Name Is Mentioned He Is Dead After His Death Petitioner Is The Legal Successor)

3. Subhi Ram Manjhi S/o Jugitram, aged years All are R/o Village Bijari, Tehsil Gharghoda, District - Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. Union Of India Through Ministry Of Coal, Rajpath Area, Central Secretariat, New Delhi 110001

2. SECL Through Its Chairman-Cum-Managing Director Seepat Road, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh)

3. South Eastern Coalfields Limited Raigarh Area, Through Its General Manager Kelo Vihar Raigarh Tehsil And District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh)

4. South Eastern Coalfields Limited Raigarh Area, Through Its Sub Area Manager Barod, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh)

5. Collector Raigarh District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh)

6. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Gharghoda, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioners :

Shri Surfaraj Khan, Advocate.

For Respondent/ State :

Shri Ashish Tiwari, G.A.

For SECL :

Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 16/08/2021 Heard.

1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners land have been acquired by the respondent No. 2- South Eastern Coal Fields Limited (SECL), under the provisions of Coal Bearing

Act(Acquisition and Development Act), 1957 (for short the "Act of 1957") in lieu of which rehabilitation have not been provided to them till date. The petitioners have also made representations before the competent authorities but it has not been considered and decided till date. He would further submit that respondents are not taking cognizance of the memo dated 04.08.2017 issued by Government of India in which certain clarifications have been issued.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

3. The prayer appears to be fair and reasonable and is accordingly allowed.

4. Considering the facts of the case, the petitioners are given liberty to make a fresh representation to Respondents No. 2 & 3 within a period of 3 weeks from today and if such representation is filed, Respondents No. 2 & 3 are directed to decided the representation strictly in accordance with law within a further period of 3 months from the date of receipt of the copy of the representation. The respondents are also directed to take cognizance of the memo dated 04.08.2017 issued by the Government of India and if the compensation is already received, they should hand over the possession of the land to the respondents so as to consider their claim in view of the aforesaid memo.

5. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) gouri Judge