Pramila Mahant Vs South Eastern Coalfields Limited

¶1

1

¶2

CGHC010269162023 2026:CGHC:27678

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 5725 of 2023

¶6

Pramila Mahant W/o Shri Bharat Das, D/o Late Lachhan Das, Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Amgaon, Post Dipka, Tehsil Katghora, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Petitioner.

¶8

Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.07.06 17:10:28 +0530

¶9

Versus

¶10

1 - South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through Chairman -Cum-Managing Director, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 495006

¶11

2 - Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Kusmunda Area, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶12

... Respondents.

¶13

(cause title downloaded from CIS Periphery)

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondents/ : Mr. Prakash Tiwari with Mr. Shayon Kar, SECL Advocates

¶15

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

¶16

Order on Board

¶17

06/07/2026

¶18

The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:-

¶19

"10.1. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioner.

¶20

10.2. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent Company to provide employment to the

¶21

2

¶22

petitioner in lieu of the acquired land by allowing her to submit nomination.

¶23

10.3. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.2 to consider the application of the petitioner and grant employment against the land acquired.

¶24

10.4. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper may also be awarded to the petitioner including the cost of the petition."

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the father of the petitioner, namely, late Lachhan Das, was the owner of land bearing Khasra No. 954/3, measuring an area of 0.202 hectares (wrongly mentioned as 'acre' instead of 'hectares'), situated at Village Durpa. The said land was acquired by the SECL in the year 1987-88, but despite repeated requests made by the late father of the petitioner for the grant of employment, no action was taken by the respondents. Therefore, the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 09.01.2023 (Annexure-P/1) for the grant of employment before the respondent SECL, but the same has not been considered till date. Hence, at this juncture, this writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the Respondents SECL to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner.

¶26

In reply, learned counsel for the respondent SECL, referring to its return, submits that against the same land mentioned by the petitioner, another person, namely, Savita Bai, has filed an application along with various documents claiming to be the daughter and legal representative of late Lachhan Das. Apart from that, there are various discrepancies in the documents filed by the petitioner Pramila Mahant and Savita Bai in respect of the death of late Lachhan Das, their caste, family tree, etc. However, he

¶27

3

¶28

submits that the representation submitted by the petitioner will be considered in accordance with law.

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed with the petition.

¶30

Though the respondent SECL has filed a return stating therein that two different persons - firstly, Pramila Mahant (petitioner) and secondly, Savita Bai, have filed applications along with certain documents claiming to be the daughter and sole legal representative of the original land oustee, namely, late Lachhan Das, but the said Savita Bai has not been impleaded by the petitioner in the present petition. Moreover, it appears that there are various discrepancies in respect of various facts pertaining to late Lachhan Das in the documents filed by both of them.

¶31

Hence, considering the limited prayer of the petitioner, at this juncture, instead of keeping the present petition pending, this Court directs the petitioner to submit a fresh representation seeking employment along with a copy of this order and other relevant documents before the Respondents SECL within a period of 15 days from today. Thereafter, the Respondents SECL shall consider and decide the said representation, preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the representation, in accordance with law.

¶32

With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶33

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶34

Sd/(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

¶35

Ajay

Pramila Mahant v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramila Mahant v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Motilal Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Neel Kumari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gangaram Vs Junior Engineer Takhatpur

Suresh Kumar Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajesh Kumar Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Omprakash Vs State of Chhattisgarh