Anand Mahato vs M/s BCCL

The writ petitioner came before this Court seeking a direction for employment under the Land Loser Scheme. WP(C) No. 1935 of 2019 was dismissed on the ground that he could not have laid a claim for employment because land acquisition proceedings were taken out in the year 1981-82.

The order dated 13th February 2024 passed in WP(C) No. 1935 of 2019 reads as under:

“The petitioner by filing this writ application is praying for a direction upon the respondents to provide him employment under the Land Loser Scheme.

It is the case of the petitioner that 47 decimals of land was acquired by the respondent-Bharat Coking Coal Ltd, for which, his two co-sharers have been given employment but the petitioner has not been given any employment. Thus, he claims employment.

During course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner himself admits that the year of birth of the petitioner is 1994, whereas, the land was acquired in the year 1981-82.

From the aforesaid admitted submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is quite clear that the land was acquired much prior to the birth of the petitioner.

In view of the aforesaid admitted fact, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. His prayer is absolutely misconceived as he cannot claim employment in lieu of acquisition of the land, which was acquired much before his birth.

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.”

Any claim for appointment under a scheme cannot be entertained about 40 years after a cause of action had arisen. If the claim raised by the appellant who was born 10 years after the land acquisition is entertained, that shall amount to providing a sort of hereditary employment. The writ Court rightly observed that the prayer made by the writ petitioner was misconceived.

We also do not find any reason to interfere in this matter and, accordingly, LPA No. 250 of 2024 is dismissed.