Narendra Kumar v. Union Of India

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 3707 OF 2019 • Narendra Kumar, S/o Gorelal, aged about 27 years, R/o Village Pali, Post Office Padaniya, Tahsil Katghora, Police Station & District Korba (CG) ... Petitioner versus 1.

Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Coal, New Delhi. 2.

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, through Chariman-cum-Managing Director, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, Bilaspur (CG) 3.

Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Kusumunda Area, District Korba (CG) 4.

Collector, Korba, District Korba (CG) 5.

Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Katghora, District Korba (CG) ... Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Samarth Pandey, Advocate.

For Respondent-UOI :

Mr. Vaibhav P. Shukla, Advocate.

For Respondent-SECL :

Mr. Sudhir Bajpai, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 05/11/2019 1.

Grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is the compensation awarded to him in respect of his land which was acquired by respondents no. 2 and 3 and also for non-considering his case for employment in lieu of his land being acquired.

2.

Counsel appearing for the respondent-SECL submits that the issue raised in the present writ petition already stands covered by the order passed by this Court on 29.8.2018 in a bunch of writ petitions, i.e., WPC No. 1850/2018 (Neera Bai Vs. Union of India & Others) and other analogous writ petitions. He further submits that in the light of the aforesaid order, the case of the petitioner also can be disposed of in similar terms.

3.

Given the said facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the order passed by this Court on 29.8.2018 in the case of Neera Bai Vs. Union of India & Others in WPC No. 1850/2018 and other analogous writ petitions, this Court is of the opinion that the case of the petitioner also can be disposed of in similar terms.

4.

Accordingly, let the petitioner move before the Tribunal in respect of the adequacy of the compensation and the interest payable on the amount of compensation to the petitioner within a period of 30 days from today. On such application being filed by the petitioner, the Tribunal shall consider and decide the same on its own merits, ignoring the aspect of limitation if any. 5.

So far as the granting of the benefit of employment under the rehabilitation policy is concerned, let the petitioner make a fresh representation to respondents no. 2 and 3 within a period of 30 days from today and the respondents no. 2 and 3 in turn shall again consider the case of the petitioner for grant of employment in lieu of his land acquired in terms of the rehabilitation policy applicable, at the earliest, preferably within a further period of three months. 6.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ JUDGE