ANIL KUMAR Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Railways.

(2.) The writ application of the appellant was dismissed by the learned Single Judge refusing to give any direction for interfering with the speaking order dated 20.02.2013 wherein the demand made upon the Railway authorities by the appellant for providing employment against the acquisition of land made by the Railways was rejected and not interfered with. The appeal, therefore, has been preferred against the said decision.

(3.) Submission of the counsel for the appellant is that the acquisition is not a matter of dispute. Varying stand has been taken by the Railway authorities. Earlier they took stand before the Writ Court that the acquisition was of the year 2000 and it is too late in the day now to consider it. When the learned Single Judge in the previous round of litigation negated that plea and directed the authorities to consider the matter afresh, a new plea, according to the counsel for the appellant, was taken that only a strip of land has been acquired and there is no provision for grant of employment to such persons whose part land has been acquired.