UMESH CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE GORAKHPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) GOVERNMENT of U. P., vide its D. O. dated 21-9-1991 has laid down a general policy providing for employment to atleast one person from a family, whose land has been scquired for a public purpose and the employment has to be given by the Department, authority or the person for whose benefit the land is acquired. It has also been mentioned in the D. O that in future whenever land is acquired, a. provision for giving employment to alteasr one member of the family, whose land has been acquired, should be incorporated in the agreement under section 41 of the Land Acquisition Act thereinafter referred to as the Act). Foliowing the above D. O., Board of Revenue, U. P. has also issued a similar direction to all District Magistrates specifically providing for incorporation of such provision in the agreement, which is to the executed under section 41 of the Act.

(2.) PETITIOEER, whose land was acquired by the Government for Gorakhpur Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the Authority), made application for his employment before the Authority in pursuance of the above policy decision of the Government. Recommendations in favour of the petitioner were also mads for giviog him employment; but he was not appointed inspite of various representations made by him in this connection before the Authority from time to time. [Having failed to get an appointment, he has filed this writ petition for write of mandmus. directing the Authority to ensure the compliance of the policy decision contained in the D. O., issusd by the Government and to appoint him to any appropriate post for which he may be eligible.

(3.) BY virtue of powers, conferred on it by the Act, the Government acquires the land and hands over its possession to the Department or the Authority for whose sake land is acquired. Land is the source of livelihood of vast population of this country and if it is acquired by the Government, its owner is definitely deprived of the source of livelihood and grant of compensation under the Act, though may give him some solace; cannot be substitute of the land, which has been acquired, it is on this ground that the Government, which runs welfare State and his responsible for the well being of the people, has laid down the policy by the above D, O. nroviding for employment against inferior post to atleast one person of the family, whose land has been acquired. The decision of the Government is fully in consonance with the concept of the welfare state and the provisions of the Constitution. Such a decision is liable to be respected by the Department or the authority for whose benefit the land is acquired by the Government.