Ghanshyam v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited

NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 1212 of 2017

1. Ghanshyam S/o Shri Komal Prasad, aged about 25 years, R/o Village Suwabhondi, Gram Panchayat Chainpur, Tahsil Pali, District Korba, (Chhattisgarh)

2. Komal Prasad S/o Shri Dhan Singh, aged about years, R/o Village Suwabhondi, Gram Panchayat Chainpur, Tahsil Pali, District Korba, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. South Eastern Coalfields Limited through the Chairman Cum Managing Director, Seepat Road Bilaspur, Civil & Revenue District Bilaspur, (Chhattisgarh)

2. The Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coal Fields Limited, Dipika Area, Korba, District Korba, (Chhattisgarh)

3. The Staff Officer (Land Revenue), South Eastern Coal Fields Limited, Dipika Area, Korba, District Korba, (Chhattisgarh)

4. The Collector, Korba, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Alok Ku. Pandey, Advocate For SECL : Shri V. R. Tiwari, Advocate For respondent/State : Shri Garry Mukhopadhyay, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 10/03/2017 The petitioners in the present writ petition have sought for a direction to the respondents to consider their case for grant of employment to petitioner no.1 in lieu of the entire agricultural land of petitioner no.2 acquired by respondent no.1 for mining purposes. 2.

The claim of the petitioners is that they have been rendered landless with no source of livelihood. As per the rehabilitation policy, it was agreed that all those persons whose land was acquired, one member of the family would be provided employment. However, the case of the petitioners is that

the petitioner no.1 has not been considered by the respondents for grant of employment.

3.

In view of the same, let the matter now be placed before respondent no.2 who in turn shall personally verify the records and reach to a conclusion whether the petitioner no.1 is entitled for any relief or not including that of employment pursuant to the land being acquired. Let the respondent no.2 take a decision within a period of 90 days from today. 4.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion so far as the entitlement of the petitioner no.1 is concerned, the Authority would be required to verify from the records whether the land of petitioner no.2 in fact was acquired or not and whether any other member of his family has already been provided employment or not. All these are the facts which would be verified by respondent no.2 and thereafter pass a speaking order in respect of the entitlement of the petitioner.

5.

With the aforesaid observation the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Bhola