KRUSHNA CHANDRA NAYAK Vs. RAILWAY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 15.1.2013 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 1032 of 2012 under Annexure-4 and to direct the opposite party-Railway Authorities to issue necessary appointment order in favour of the petitioner under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme as against any substantive vacancy commensurate with his qualification as his family is in distress condition.

(2.) Petitioner's case in brief is that when the father of the petitioner continued to be a recorded tenant under the State Government having absolute right, title and interest over the properties appertaining to Plot Nos. 2314, 2318, 2319, 2320 and 2325 under Khata No. 754 in Mouza Godiputmatiapada under Delanga Tahasil in the district of Puri and his family was earning their livelihood out of usufructs from the said property through agriculture, the process of acquisition of land was initiated by the authorities of the State Government for the purpose of construction of Khurda Road- Bolangir New B.G. Rail Link Project in the year, 1999 to be undertaken by the East Coast Railway under the Ministry of Railways. Consequentially Land Acquisition Case No. 05 of 1999 was registered before the Land Acquisition Officer pertaining to the landed property of his family and similar other persons of the locality. In the process of such acquisition of land, a sum of Rs. 78,292/- was granted as compensation in favour of his family by the Land Acquisition Officer, Puri, which was received by his family on 25.5.2001 without prejudice to the rights and contentions, if any. In view of such acquisition of the land, no other alternative plots were allotted to his family save and except the amount of compensation. When the family of the petitioner along with many other similarly situated persons of the locality enquired about the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme providing employment to the family of the land oustees, the authorities suggested that the said aspect was under active consideration and necessary notification would come out, once it is finalized. After passage of several years, ultimately the Railway Authorities decided to grant the benefit of compassionate appointment to the family of those land oustees whose lands were acquired and/or to be acquired. In consequence of such decision, the Government of India in its Ministry of Railways vide Notification No. E (NG) 11/2010/RC-5/1 dated 16.7.2010 under Annexure-2 notified a scheme for providing employment to one of the family members of the land oustee in deserving cases as against the land acquired by the Railways for its various projects. Pursuant to the said notification, the petitioner submitted an application before the opposite party no. 3-Divisional Railway Manager, East Coast Railway, Khurda Road for consideration of his case for compassionate appointment under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme commensurate with his educational qualification. Along with such application, the petitioner enclosed a certificate regarding 'No Objection' from the family members along with his educational testimonials as per requirement of the authorities as well as an undertaking expressing his willingness to work against any available vacancy. The further case of the petitioner is that though he satisfied all the eligibility criteria coming within the zone of consideration to avail the benefit of Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme so far as it relates to grant of employment as a land oustee/loser, he has not received any communication on his application and pending consideration of his application, in the recent past, the opposite partyauthorities have gone for recruitment of fresh candidates ignoring his case. Due to non-consideration of the application of the petitioner for grant of benefit under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme for an inordinate period, the petitioner made a representation to the authorities in this regard. The said representation having not been considered, he approached the Central Administrative Tribunal,Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 1032 of 2012 seeking a direction to the opposite party-authorities to consider his case for appointment under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme (Annexure-2) as a land loser and for a further direction to issue necessary order of appointment in his favour against any available vacancy commensurate to his educational qualification within a stipulated time. The Tribunal after hearing the parties vide order dated 15.1.2013 dismissed the O.A. Against the said order of dismissal, the petitioner has approached this Court in the present writ petition seeking appropriate relief.

(3.) Mr. S. Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the Tribunal is not justified in holding that the notification issued by the Railway Board on 16.7.2010 cannot be made applicable to the case of the petitioner since the land of petitioner's family has been acquired much prior to the date of notification. The notification in question is issued with regard to appointment of land losers affected by the land acquisition for Railway Projects. Since the said notification covers up the displaced persons whose land has been acquired and also whose land are being acquired, the Tribunal is not correct in holding that the said notification is not applicable retrospectively.