^o. • ^^^ ;.-'.'i7 ^-r^^ ..•••' ••Sfls3r^""" MS' »e?*v'»AW y UE^-"" BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (S) No ^O 2-\ 12007 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Chandra Pratap Rajwade, S/o. Amol Say, aged about 38 years, R/o. Village- Katgodi, Tahsil & P.S. Sonhat, District Koria (C-G-) VERSUS 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Rehabilitation Department, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Collector, Koria At & Post Baikunthpur, District Koria(C.G.) /2^^" 3. Chief Managing Director, South Eastern Coal Fields Limited, Seepat ^toad, Bilaspur (C.G.) 4. Chief General Manager, S.E.C.L., Baikunthpur Area, At & Post Baikunthpur, District Koria (C.G.) 5. Personal Manager, S.E.C.L., Baikunthpur Area, Baikunthpur, District Koria (C.G.) WRIT PETmON UMD£R ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. HIGH COIJRT OF CHHATTISGARH AT^ILASPUR WRTT PETmON fS) No. 6021 of2007 ["' PETmONER RESPONDENTS Chandra Pratap Raiwade. VERSUS : The State ofCUhattisgarh & Olfaers. WRTT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agmhotri, J. Present Shri A.K.Prasad, Advocate with Shri Roshan Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S.Bhatia, Deputy Government Advocate forthe State/ respondents 1 and 2. Shri P.S.Koshy, Advocate with Shri Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate for the respondents 3 to 5. ORDER{ORAL) (Passed on 1 Ith day of September, 2009) 1. ThepetitionerclaimsforgTantofemploymenttoonefamilymembermIieu of acquisition ofhis residential house under the rehabilitation policy ofthe State Govermnent dated 25th Septeraber, 1991 (Amexure P/4). The Coal authorities, by impugned order dated 26 July, 2007 (Aanexure P/l) have declined to provide employment on the ground that only 6.04% ofthe total land of the petitioner has been acquired, thus, clause 3(a) of tfae policy is not applieable. 2. Shri Prasad, leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it appears that the Coal authorities have ignored clause 3(c) of the rehabilitation policy, which is required to be considered in case of acquisition ofthe residential land. •\ a Be Ihat as it may, Shri Koshy, leamed counsel for the respondents 3 to 5 fairly submits that the case offhe petitioner shall be considered afresh by the Coal aufhorities in accordance with the rehabilitation policy havinj regard to the letter dated 29UI/31st March, 2007 (Annexure P/I6) written by fhe Chief General Manager, Baikunthpur Area to the Deputy General Manager (Man Power), S.E.C.L. Bilaspur. In view ofthe foregoing, according to Shri Prasad, nothing survives for adjudication at this stage. Aceordingly, wifhout expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the petition is disposed of. If the petitioner desires to file a separate representation, he may do so. -- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Amit