^?~^.^^i!:;Sf!^^^^Sy';:;s^ ;S3S^SB^^i^^^^S^^ '^^^^v^^^^^^^^^'. SiS^?^^ t^'5 -i ^- 'Ttw !' ": i . IIUii HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR Writ Petition No. 176or20fl4 PETITIQNERS 1 ARJUN DEWANGAN, S/0 SHRI IVIADANLAL, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, WO VlLLAGE-CHHURt, TAHSIL-KATGHORA, DISTRICT KORBA,(C.G.) 2 PEEKRAM, S/0 SHRI TULSIRAM, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R^) VIL.LAGE- PUNARWAS, VILLAGE- KOHANDIYA, TAHSIL-KORBA, DISTRIGTKORBA, (C.G^ VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1 NADONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION, tHROUGH: THE GENERAL MANAGER/CHAIRMAN, SEEPAT,DISTRICTKORBA(C.G.) 2 THE ADDITIONAL GEI^ERAL MANAGER, NATIONAL TI-fERMAL POWER CCiRPQRATION SEERAT, DISTRICT KORBA (C.G.) 3 THECHIEFPERSONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORF'ORAflON.XORBA, DISTRICT KORBA,(C.G.) 4 THE COLLECTOR, DISTRICT KORBA.KCPBA (C.G.) » 5 THE SUB DIVISIONAL OEF1GER (REVENUE), TAHSIL-KATGMC3RA, . DISTRICT KORBA, (C.Gj ' 6 PARMESHWAR SINGH KAIWWRT MAJDOOR, TOWAN ADMINISTRATION EMPLOYE6 SIO. 25834 N.T.P.C. KORBA, DISTRICT KORBA<C.G.) WRITPETITKSNUNDERARTICI.E 226/227 OFTHE CONSTITUTIONOFINDIA ADDearance: Shri Ranjeet Kumar MaZumdar, counsel for the petitioners. Shri B.D.Guru,counselfor spQndentsNo.1to3.< Shri Sumityerma.PanelLawyerforthe State/ respondents No, 4 :&5. ,• . :, 1 ; ' •• ' .' !. None for respondent No. 6. i ^ii?ii'^itlill ^- _ W.PjS81No. 176 of2004 ORALORDER (12.10.2007) SUNILKUMAR SINHA. J. l-1eard. The petitioners are successors of land oustees whoselands were acquired by N.T.P.C. It is contended that the father of petitioner No.1 namely Madanlal and his co-parcener namely Chamra Sao have given their iand'm Khata No.130area 2.055 hectares and in Khafa No.28area 7.129 hectares in favour of respondent No.1. Likewise, father of petitioner No.2 namely Tulsiram with other co-sharers Munshiram,sonoflate Shri Sakharam and Smt. Bhoori have given their land 'm Khata No. 130 area .428 hectares, Khate No. 129 area 7.290 hectares, Khate No. 119 area 4.710 hectares, Khata No. 176 area .360 hectares in favour of respondent No.1. The grievances of the petitioners are that though the promise was made to the land oustees that under Rehabilitation Scheme one member of each such family shall be give employmentin Establishment of N.T.P.C. but N.T.P.C. has not given employment tothem. Therefore, it has been prayed that the respondents be directed to give emptoyment to atteast one member of each family oftheland oustees i.e. the petitioners herein. Shri B.D. Guru, leamed counsel appearing for respondents No.lto 3 has contended that respondents No. 1 tp 3 have framed Rehabilitation Action Plan afterconsultation of Village Developfflent Advisory Committee and the District Administration. It has further been contented that a Comprehensive Rehabilitation Action Plan was framed after series of discussions. He shows me the copy of Rehabilitation Plan. The respondents are duty bound toadherethe policy decision and there is no question of any discrimination or arbitrariness. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits thatthere is inordinate delay in part of the respondents and till today, N.T.P.C. has not given appointment to the petitioners, who are family members of the lahd oustees. W.P.(^No. 176 of2004 1 have perused the Rehabilitation Action Plan. Clause 3 ofthe said Plan is regarding employment, apart from other Rehabilitation Plans and it has been mentioned therein that "direct employment in N.T.P.G. in the unskilled category only PAPs would be considered. In the skilled category preference would be given to them. In both categories employment shall be subject to the availability df vacancies, N.T.P.C.'s recruitment policy and Govt.'s policy on reservation". Clause 3.1.1 and 3.1.2deal with eligibility for employment. Therefore, the respondents have not completely denied the prayer made by the petitioners but their contention is that they willconsider the request ofthe petitioners subject to Clauses 3 & 3.1 ofthe Rehabilitation Action Plan i.e. subject to availability of vacancies and eligibility of the family member of the land oustees. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the peUtioners are required to make application for appointments showing that theyare the land oustee/successor of the land oustee along with their qualitication certificates etc. to respondent No.1 and respondentNo.1 shall eonsider the application submitted by the., petitioners in accordance with Rehabililtetion Action Plan and shall try to give employment to the petitioners/land oustee as per the promise given to the land oustees whose lands were acquired by them. With aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands finalty disposed of. Sd/- SunilKumarSinha \ Judge , vatti