Dismissed

Budhan Gope Alias Budhan Yadav v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. through Chairman Cum Managing Director

Jharkhand HC16 Jun 2022WPC/1784/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought employment for his son after residential property was allegedly acquired by respondent. Court found a title dispute existed. W petition dismissed as not maintainable; title to be declared in civil court.

What did the court decide?

relief sought in para 1 of writ petition rejected; petition disposed of without grant of employment.

Budhan Gope Alias Budhan Yadav Vs Bharat Coking Coal… — Property and Title | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(S) No. 1784 of 2020

¶3

Budhan Gope @ Budhan Yadav, aged about 54 years, S/o Late Mewal Gope @ Newal Gope, R/o Vill. & P.O.- Nudkharki, P.S.-Baghmara, Dist. Dhanbad … … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. (in short M/S BCCL) through Chairman cum Managing Director, Koyla Bhawan, P.O. & P.S. Saraidhela, Dist. Dhanbad

¶6

Chief General Manager (P & IR), Headquarter of M/S BCCL, Koyla Bhawan, P.O. and P.S. Saraidhela, Dist. Dhanbad

¶7

General Manager, Block II Area of M/S BCCL, Dumra, P.O. Nawagarh, P.S. Madhuban, Dist. Dhanbad

¶8

… … Respondents

¶9

¶10

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶11

¶12

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Vipul Poddar, Advocate

¶13

¶14

8 /16.06.2022 Learned counsel for the parties are present.

¶15

2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

¶16

“ For provide forthwith employment to the son of the petitioner namely Shashikant Yadav which already forwarded to the Headquarter of M/S BCCL for approval in lieu of acquisition of his residential house-premises at Nudkharki Bast No. 2 standing over on the Plot No. 602, Area-2, Kattha, Mouza, Nudkharki, Khata No. 76, Thana-82 Dist. Dhanbad for Block –II, Open Cast Project under Block-II Area of M/S BCCL.

¶17

For decide the representation dated 26.02.19(Annexure-9) for employment to the son of the petitioner in lieu of acquisition of their residential house premise, in accordance with law and after giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner or to his representative.”

¶18

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner is seeking employment by stating that the landed property of the petitioner has been acquired by the respondents.

¶19

4. On the other hand the respondents has taken a specific stand in paragraph 6 of his counter affidavit that the property is vested with BCCL by virtue of Coal Mines Nationalization and has also produced a copy of the certified copy of the Khatiyan along with counter affidavit. The counsel for the respondent has submitted that there is title dispute involved in this case and therefore no relief as prayed for by the petitioner can be granted in this writ petition.

¶20

¶21

5. Considering the aforesaid submission, there appears to be title dispute with respect to the property involved in this case and accordingly this court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition and grant relief to the petitioner as prayed for in para 1 of the writ petition. However, it will be open to the petitioner to get his title declared from the competent court of civil jurisdiction with respect to the property involved in this case.

¶22

6. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶23

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶24

Binit

Budhan Gope Alias Budhan Yadav v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. through Chairman Cum Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Budhan Gope Alias Budhan Yadav v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. through Chairman Cum Managing Director

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

Parmanand Goswami Vs the State of Jharkhand

Updesh Kumar Dubey Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Inspector General of Police

Clodia Soreng Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Human Resources Development Department

Mary Tuti Vs Ranchi University Represented through Its Registrar and Ors.

Ram Charitra Pandey Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Mary Tuti Vs the Bank of India through Its Chairman and Ors.