Case: Mahanadi Coal Fields Ltd. &amp; Another Vs. Mathias Oram &amp; Others

the discharge of their duties in terms of the scheme."4. In pursuance of the orders of this Court, a report was submitted by Justice Parichha which was accepted by this Court but the implementation thereof still remained incomplete.5. Learned Amicus has submitted a report dated 4th July 2017 in respect of outstanding issues and has made recommendations as follows:-"(i) As far as any compensation amount which is lying in fixed deposits is concerned, the same must be accounted for at periodic intervals jointly by the Collector as well as by a senior officer of MCL. The said amounts must be safeguarded suitably by the Commission and the Commission would be at liberty to seek appropriate direction from this Court as and when its work is completed.(ii) Issue directions to the Collector, Sundargarh as well as the Chairman and Managing Director of MCL to ensure disbursement of compensation to all the beneficiaries of the 8 villages (namely Balinga, Bankibahal, Garjan Bahal, Gopalpur, Karlikachar, Kunda, Sardega and Tiklipada) on or before 31st July 2017, and to ensure disbursement of compensation to all the beneficiaries of the 2 villages, (namely Siarmal and Bangurkela) on or before 31st November, 2017.(iii) The Divisional Commissioner, Sambalpur, to make adequate efforts to trace the persons who have not turned up to receive compensation. The Collectors concerned will contact their counterparts in States where awardees are known to migrate, and adopt suitable methodologies to identify the concerned person.(iv) Issue directions to the authorities of MCL to furnish a list, jointly verified by the Collector and the Assistant Revenue Officer indicating the names of the all awardees of compensation, the dates when they were entitled to payment, the actual dates when payment was made and whether that payment included interest, to the Claims Commission as well as the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent parties.(v) It may be clarified that even with respect two villages (namely Siarmal and Bangurkela), when the payment of compensation is made, interest, as payable, will be determined to be paid in accordance with Orders of the Honble Supreme Court. Payment of interest in respect of delayed payment will be undertaken if interest was not paid in accordance with the Orders of the Court.(vi) where genuine cases of fraud and impersonation are alleged by MCL, the Claims Commission be empowered to examine such cases and forward recommendations to the Learned Amicus.(vii) Direct the authorities of MCL to complete the process of granting employment, payment of monetary compensation in lieu of employment, including annuities on or before 31st July 2017 with respect to 8 villages (namely Balinga, Bankibahal, Garjan Bahal, Gopalpur, Karlikachar, Kunda, Sardega and Tiklipada) and on or before 31st November, 2017 with respect to 2 villages (namely Siarmal and Bangurkela).(viii) Issue directions to the Chairman and Managing Director of MCL to immediately stop any illegal mining being undertaken by MCL on agricultural lands in any of the villages.(ix) Issue directions to MCL authorities to complete the development of resettlement colonies in the two sites (namely Barapalli II and Chatanpalli) on or before 30th September, 2017.(x) Once even one of the rehabilitation sites is ready and the site has been certified as suitable for shifting by the Claims Commission, the Honble Claims Commission may pay pass appropriate orders enabling the shifting of those persons who are entitled to R&R Benefits in the said site.In view of the above, it is submitted that the following general directions are also necessary -(xi) That the Managing Director of MCL either himself or by a designated officer will be personally responsible for the implementation of the directions of the Supreme Court and the orders by the Commission.(xii) Suitable steps will be taken by the MCL to complete the process of disbursement of compensation.(xiii) Compensation will be disbursed to the satisfaction of the Commission.(xiv) Employment must be offered to all those left out (Categories I & II in any event) and such employment must be offered and completed to the satisfaction of the Commission.(xv) Rehabiliation steps must be completed within a period of nine months from today.(xvi) Only upon the rehabilitation being certified by the Commission and experts that a notice can be issued by the Commission asking the oustees to shift to alternate sites.(xvii) Fresh notices be issued by the Commission in respect of awardees who have not received monies(xviii) In respect of awardees who have not been paid money in time, interest is payable and such interest be awarded at a rate not exceeding 15% by the Commission calculating the same with reference to the orders of this Honble Court.(xix) It is also necessary that a list of all the awardees including the names and the amounts disbursed to them, jointly signed by the Collector and MCL, must be made available to the Claims Commission as well as counsel for the oustees forthwith,(xx) In so far as acquisition of additional land for resettlement and rehabilitation is concerned, suitable assistance will be offered by the State authorities including the Divisional Commissioner Sambalpur."6. We are broadly in agreement with the recommendations made by the learned Amicus. We, however, leave it open to the appellants or any other affected parties to put forward their objections before the High Court/Commission since we are inclined to leave such matters to be dealt with by the High Court/Commission.7. With regard to recommendation XIV, learned counsel for the appellants has an objection on the ground that the issue is covered by the Orrisa Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy 2006. Learned Amicus states that the recommendation is consistent with the report of Parichha Commission which has already been accepted by this Court. This aspect of the matter may be gone into by the High Court, if necessary.8. One of the issues which is surviving is as regards constructed housing on the land allocated for rehabilitation and resettlement by the affected persons. Mr. Dhankar, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants states that it is not clear whether all such persons want constructed housing or not.

Decision (1 = appeal accepted, 0 = rejected): 1

Explanation:
1[ds]6. We are broadly in agreement with the recommendations made by the learned Amicus. We, however, leave it open to the appellants or any other affected parties to put forward their objections before the High Court/Commission since we are inclined to leave such matters to be dealt with by the High Court/Commission.7. With regard to recommendation XIV, learned counsel for the appellants has an objection on the ground that the issue is covered by the Orrisa Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy 2006. Learned Amicus states that the recommendation is consistent with the report of Parichha Commission which has already been accepted by this Court. This aspect of the matter may be gone into by the High Court, if