Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Prabhat Kumar Mishra S/o. Vs South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. (Chhattisgarh High Court)
Appeal Number : WPC No. 1778 of 2015
Date of Judgement/Order : 03/08/2016
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

1. Both the writ petitions arise out of the order passed by the Collector, Korba on 24.9.2013, which was rendered pursuant to the order dated 24.2.2013 passed by this Court in WPC No. 5187/2010, therefore, both the petitions are being decided by this common order.

2. In WPC No. 1778/2015, the land holder is seeking direction to the respondent/South Eastern Coalfields Limited (henceforth ‘SECL’) to consider his claim for appointment/employment in accordance with the Rehabilitation Policy of 1991 and provide appointment/employment in lieu of acquisition of his land together with all monetary benefits and amenities pursuant to the order in WPC No. 5187/2010 dated 4.2.2013 and the order passed by the Collector on 24.9.2013.

3. WPC No. 1780/2015 has been preferred by the SECL assailing the legality and validity of the enquiry report/order passed by the Collector, Korba on 24.9.2013.

4. Facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the petitioner purchased the subject land from one Jethuram on 18.8.1993. It is claimed by the petitioner that possession of the land was taken over by the SECL in the year 1994 for establishment of Pawan Incline at Village Rajgamar, Korba Area. A proposal was sent by the SECL, Korba on 12.5.1994 for acquisition of 2.769 hectares of land, however, compensation was determined only in respect of 2.669 hectares belonging to 12 land holders, who have already been paid the amount. On account of mistake in not acquiring the land belonging to 5 land holders namely, Kanhaiya Singh Yadav, Prabhat Kumar Mishra (petitioner), Sarswati, Harihar Singh and Rishikant Roy, the SECL sent a communication to the Deputy Collector, Korba on 20/21.4.2003 wherein referring to its previous letter dated 16.1.2003, the said Deputy Collector was requested to acquire the land and determine the compensation in respect of the above named 5 persons. It was specifically stated in the letter that the land be acquired as per 1994 acquisition when the original proposal was sent so that compensation could be paid to the affected persons.

5. It appears, the SECL sent a formal proposal for acquisition of the land belonging to the above-stated 5 persons on 6/8th May, 2003 whereupon the Collector, Korba issued notice to the affected persons on 17.2.2004. This fact is mentioned in the Land Acquisition Officer’s order dated 25.3.2006 (Annexure-P/3). Special Gram Sabha was convened in the concerned village on 17.8.2004 for which notice to the affected persons was sent on 3.8.2004. Gram Sabha approved the acquisition and resolution of the Gram Sabha was sent to the Collector on 18.8.2004. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) was published in the official gazette on 8.12.2004 and in the newspapers on 28.9.2004 and 1.10.2004. Section 6 notification was published in the official gazette on 20.5.2005 and in 2 newspapers on 7.5.2005 and 8.5.2005. Notice under Section 9 was issued to the land holders and thereafter award was passed on 25.3.2006 granting interest from the date of possession i.e. 16.6.1996. The petitioner thereafter moved a representation for seeking benefit of the employment.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031