SUNAND PRASAD SAO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant claiming himself to be a displaced person had approached this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 3200 of 1993 (R) seeking a direction for appointment in terms of the State Government Guidelines. The writ petition was dismissed vide order dated 16.03.2007. The appellant again moved this Court in W.P.(S) No. 4497 of 2009 seeking a direction for consideration of his candidature for appointment as a - displaced person under the Subarnarekha Multipurpose Project. Aggrieved by dismissal of W.P.(S) No. 4497 of 2009 vide order dated 16.08.2013, the appellant has approached this Court by filing the present Letters Patent Appeal.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that, about 7.81 acres of land in Mauja Ichagarh, District Seraikella-Kharsawan belonging to the father of the appellant was acquired in the year 1987-88 for Subarnarekha Multipurpose Project. A Vikas Pustika bearing No. 4283 dated 30.05.1987 was issued in the name of the father of the appellant in which the age and qualification of the appellant have been mentioned. A list of eligible persons whose lands were acquired was prepared for appointment by the respondents in the year 1988-1989 and the name of the appellant figured as serial No. 626 in the combined list prepared for all the villages under acquisition. The appellant was not offered appointment on the ground that he was a minor at the relevant time. The appellant approached this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 3200 of 1993 (R) which was dismissed in view of the fact that the appellant had not attained majority at the relevant time. Vide Memo No. 1212 dated 18.09.1993 a scheme was framed by the State Government to give appointment to the displaced persons on a priority basis. The appellant's family falls under the category priority Class-I however, no list in terms of Memo dated 18.09.1993 was prepared and the respondents continued to make appointment from the old list. In the year, 2003 applications were again invited from the displaced persons whose land had been acquired for Subarnarekha Multipurpose Project and the appellant submitted his application on 24.08.2003. However, the appellant was not granted appointment and therefore, he submitted representation on 06.08.2008 to the Secretary, Water Resources Department, Additional Director, Rehabilitation Land Acquisition, Subarnarekha Multipurpose Project and Administrator, Subarnarekha Multipurpose Project. Since, the appellant was not offered appointment, he approached the Writ Court by filing W.P.(S) No. 4497 of 2009.

(3.) In the writ proceeding, a counter-affidavit was filed stating that the father of the present applicant namely, Sri Hiralal Sao was displaced person and he was paid compensation and rehabilitation grant for the land acquired for the Subarnarekha Multipurpose Project. The appellant was not considered for appointment as he had secured only 353 marks in the matriculation examination whereas, the candidate last selected in the backward class category had secured 430 marks and also for the reason that the appellant was aged about 16 years only at that time. It is further stated that if the appellant applies for self-employment grant amounting to Rs. 75,000/- in prescribed format, the rehabilitation officer would duly sanction the same and the said amount would be given to the appellant.