SHYAM DEV Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners claim themselves to be the land oustees, whose land has been acquired for the benefits of respondents, have now staked a claim for petitioner No. 2? for a suitable job, pursuant to the Government Order. The issue is squarely covered in the case of Ravindra Kumar v. District Magistrate Agra and others, 2005 1 UPLBEC 118, wherein this Court has held as under:

(2.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as entire compensation has not been paid, petitioner No. 2 was entitled for a suitable job with the respondent establishment. Non-payment of compensation in lieu of acquisition of land could not be the basis to claim appointment in service.