SHAMBHU MAHTO Vs. B.C.C.L.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these writ petitions have been argued and contested on the common grounds between the parties, they have been heard analogous. Since the grievances of the petitioners are common and have been contested on common grounds, for the convenience sake, facts as are pleaded in respect of the writ petition No. 3813/2005, are being noticed herein for the purpose of deciding the controversy raised herein.

(2.) The case of the petitioners are that after their appointment under the respondent BCCL in the year 1981, they continued in service till the respondents terminated their services in the year 2003 by letter dated 22nd December 2003, on the ground that they had procured employment in lieu of their lands with the specific condition that they will hand over their lands for the use of the company for mining purposes, they have failed to fulfill their commitment and vacant possession of the lands were not handed over to the company which frustrated the very purpose of extending the benefit of employment to these petitioners against the said lands. Therefore, their services were terminated as the very foundation of employment and handing over dispute free workable physical possession of the land remained unfulfilled. As per the petitioners, the Management of the BCCL took a decision on 01st October 1980 for purchasing 51.93 acres of land required for Sendra Basjora Colliery for the purposes of quarrying, De-pillaring, sand stowing bunker, etc. The Management acquired the entire land of village Gareri and started mining operation over the land in question without any proper requisition and registration order. The Management thereafter gave employment to 32 persons in a package deal against 61.40 acres of land of the said village and provided one job each to the family whose land was acquired. Thus, these petitioners along with others were appointed in the year 1981 and by letter dated 27th May 1981, they were directed to report for mining training at vocational training centre which they successfully completed. Pursuant thereto, they were appointed and directed to report for duty under the respondents.

(3.) Petitioners' services were confirmed by the respondent BCCL and Service Books were opened in the year 1987 and service excerpts were also supplied to the individual petitioners which indicated that their initial appointment was made on 20th May 1981 and CMPF accounts were also opened. Petitioners had been working since 1981 without any complaint till issuance of the order dated 22nd December 2003 which terminated the services of the petitioners on the aforesaid grounds. As it appears, while the services of 32 persons were terminated, only 19 persons moved before this Court challenging the order dated 22nd December 2003 in WPS No. 6145/2004 and WPS No. 6483/2004. The learned Single Judge on the said occasion, by judgment dated 4th February 2005, disposed of the writ petitions holding that the action taken by the company is fully justified and needs no interference. However, on the other hand, on the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners that they will give specific details of their lands against which they / their father claimed and secured employment in the year 1981 and also gave workable physical possession of their lands to the satisfaction of the company, the company was directed to take a decision in the matter within a period of two months from the date of compliance of the order.