NILA DEI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed against the impugned Order Dated 16.10.2000 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 872 of 1996 directing that in case the Respondents decide to engage casual labourers for Koraput -Rayagada Railway Line, then the applicant's son whose case has been duly recommended should be given preferential treatment more so because out of 200 posts which were to be thrown open to land oustees, 12 posts are yet to be filled up. However, the Tribunal in the impugned order has held that as the Petitioner has not approached the Tribunal for the last ten years, the claim for providing employment to her son is not maintainable as it is not a vested right, which can be enforced at any time in future. In view of this, the Tribunal has held that the application of the Petitioner is without any merit.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the Petitioner belongs Scheduled Tribe and her land to the extent of Ac.9.24 dec. out of total land of Ac.10.34 under Khata No. 114/277 of village Tikiri was acquired by the S.E. Railway for construction of Koraput -Rayagada Railway Line in the year 1986. Besides getting compensation for acquired land, one member of each family whose lands were acquired was en titled to get employment on rehabilitation ground under the guidelines issued by the Railway. The name of the son of the Petitioner was recommended by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, (Railway), Koraput vide letter No. 922 dated 4.10.1991 for providing employment. As no action was taken, the Petitioner served a legal notice on the Railway authority on 23.8.1995 requesting to take immediate steps in the matter of providing employment to her son. Even then nothing happened &, therefore, the Petitioner was compelled to file the O.A. before the Tribunal which has been dismissed. Hence, this Writ Petition.

(3.) IT appears that notice under Section 4(c) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued to the Petitioner on 19.9.1987 vide Annexure -2. Notice under Section 12(2) was issued to her on 24.3.1988 to appear before the Land Acquisition Collector on 20.4.1988 to receive compensation. From Annexure -6, the letter dated 4.10.1999 of the Special. Land Acquisition Officer (Railway), Koraput addressed to the Chief Engineer (Con.), S.E. Railway, Laxmipur, it appears that Ac.9.24 decimals of land belonging to Petitioner was acquired for Koraput -Rayagada Railway Line but by letter dated 8.6.1989 the name of her brother was wrongly recommended for providing employment. When the Petitioner approached the Special Land Acquisition Officer by filing a petition, the mistake was corrected and the name of her son was recommended. As the Railway authorities did not take any action, the Petitioner served legal notice and after obtaining the certificate from the Land Acquisition Officer approached the Tribunal in 1996. In view of the aforesaid, the Tribunal was not right in holding that as the Petitioner has not approached the Tribunal for the last 10 years, her claim for providing employment to her son was not maintainable.