Disposed

Ashok Kumar Agrawal and Ors. v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC4 Aug 2016WPC/1527/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court heard applications to vacate an interim order staying eviction. The Court disposed of the petition without commenting on merits, directing the Collector to examine the petitioners' claim for employment as land oustees within four months based on a relevant Policy.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Collector to examine the petitioners' case for employment as land oustees within four months.

Ashok Kumar Agrawal and Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors. — Chhattisgarh HC (2016) — LawSathi Research

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

WPC No. 1527 of 2012

¶4

Ashok Kumar Agrawal, S/o Late Shri Ghasi Ram Agrawal Aged About 46 Years,

¶5

Sunil Kumar Agrawal S/o Late Ghasi Ram Agrawal Aged About 39 Years

¶6

Manoj Kumar Agrawal, S/o. Late Shri Ghasi Ram Agrawal, aged about 37 years

¶7

All the above are R/o Village Churikala, Tahsil Katghora, Distt. Korba C.G.

¶8

---- Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary Deptt. of Industries / Revene D.K.S. Bhawan Mantralaya Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

Collector Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.)

¶12

Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Katghora, Tahsil Katghora Distt. Korba (C.G.)

¶13

General Manager N.T.P.C. Limited, Korba Distt. Korba (C.G.)

¶14

---- Respondents --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Petitioner : Mr. Surfaraj Khan, Advocate For State/Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mr. R.K. Gupta, Dy. Adv. General For Respondent No.4-NTPC : Mr. B.D. Guru, Advocate ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board

¶16

04/08/2016

¶17

Heard.

¶18

Applications for vacating the interim order have been filed by the respondents. There is an interim order dated 06.09.2012 that if the petitioners continue in possession, no steps should be taken to remove them till the next date of hearing. This order continue till date.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petition can be disposed off with a direction to the respondents to decide petitioners' claim for employment as they are land oustees.

¶20

According to the petitioners there is a Policy dated 23.02.2007 providing for employment to land oustees.

¶21

Without commenting on merits of the petitioners' claim, considering that the petitioners' grievance is now confined only to the aspect of the employment, the respondent - Collector shall examine the petitioners' case for employment on the basis of the Policy, which was in force on the date, when the land was acquired by the respondents, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶22

With this observation, the petition stands disposed off.

¶23

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge

¶24

Chandra

Ashok Kumar Agrawal and Ors. v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar Agrawal and Ors. v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mitrabhanu Rathia Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

A. B. Chanda Vs South Eastern Coalfield Limited

Shyam Charan Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Bahadur Singh Marko Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhabilal Baghel Vs The State Of Chhattisgarh

Ramchand Vs State Of Chhattisgarh