Patna High Court - Orders
Pradeep Kumar Pandey & Ors vs The Union Of India & Ors on 6 December, 2012
Bench: Prakash Chandra Verma, Jayanandan Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1850 of 2012
======================================================
1. Pradeep Kumar Pandey S/O Late Sudarshan Pandey R/O Vill-Kurro, P.S.-
Bounsi, Distt-Banka
2. Saurabh Kumar Choudhary S/O Jayanandan Prasad Choudhary R/O Vill-
Achraj,P.S.-Bounsi, Distt-Banka
3. Dilip Kumar Dubey S/O Late Kailash Dubey R/O Vill-Kurro, P.S.-Bounsi,
Distt-Banka
4. Sanjeev Kumar Pandey S/O Ashwani Kumar Pandey R/O Vill-Lalmatiya, P.S.-
Bounsi, Distt-Banka
5. Ujjwal Kumar Singh S/O Swatantra Kumar Singh R/O Vill-Lakhpura, P.S.-
Panjwara, Distt-Banka
6. Geeta Rani Singh W/O Shyama Prasad Singh R/O Vill-Parejan (Sikandarpur),
P.S.-Bounsi, Distt-Banka
7. Neelam Devi W/O Lai Uttam Nath Sahdeo R/O Vill-Sikandarpur, P.S.-Bounsi,
Distt-Banka
8. Ram Prasad Singh S/O Sri Tetro Singh R/O Vill-Sikanderpur, P.S.-Bounsi,
Distt-Banka
9. Arvind Kumar Singh S/O Late Shaligarm Prasad Singh R/O Vill-Sikandarpur,
P.S.-Bounsi, Distt-Banka
10. Sanjeev Kumar Singh S/O Kamla Prasad Singh R/O Irrigation Department
Colony, P.S.-Bounsi, Distt-Banka
11. Pramod Kumar Singh S/O Brij Mohan Prasad Singh R/O Vill-Bindi, P.S.-
Banka, Distt-Banka
12. Preeti Pandey @ Preeti Devi W/O Late Amit Kumar Pandey R/O Vill-Lal
Matiya, P.S.-Bounsi, Distt-Banka
13. Gautam Kumar Pandey S/O Sudhir Kumar Pandey R/O Vill-Sirain, P.S.-
Bounsi, Distt-Banka
14. Abdul Haseeb Khan S/O Abdul Samad Khan R/O Vill-Babudin, P.S.-Baunsi,
Distt-Banka
15. Jai Kumar Choudhary S/O Bhardrahil Choudhary R/O Vill-Sivain, P.S.-
Bounsi, Distt-Banka
.... .... Appellants
Versus
1. The Union of India through Secretary, Department of Railway, Rail Bhawan,
New Delhi
2. The Secretary, Department Of Railway, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
3. The General Manager, Eastern Railway-17, Netaji Subhash Road, Have Street,
Calcutta (W.B)
4. The Chief Administrative Officer (Construction) Officer, Eastern Railway, 17,
Netaji Subhash Road, Have Street, Calcutta (W.B.)
5. The Deputy General Manager, Eastern Railway, 17 Netaji Subhash Road, Have
Street, Calcutta (W.B.)
6. The Divisional Railway Manager, Eastern Railway, Malda (W.B)
7. The Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), Eastern Railway, Bhagalpur
8. The State of Bihar
9. The District Magistrate, Banka
10. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Banka
11. Sanjeev Kumar Jha @ Sanjeev Kumar Ojha S/O Ram Narain Jha R/O Vill-
Haria, P.S.-Bounsi, Distt-Banka
12. Phanider Nath Pathak S/O Moti Pathak R/O Vill-Panda Tola (Opposite Side of
Rail Line), P.S.-Bounsi, Distt-Banka
.... .... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellants : Mr. Y.V. Giri, Sr. Advocate
2 Patna High Court LPA No.1850 of 2012 (4) dt.06-12-2012
2/3
Mr. Balram Kapri, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Anil Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA
VERMA
And
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA
VERMA)
3 06-12-2012This letters patent appeal has been filed against the order dated 04.09.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC No.7047 of 2008.
The writ petition was filed by the petitioners-appellants seeking the benefit of Scheme 1989 as the appellants' land was acquired in 1999 but the benefit was denied to them on the ground of the Railway Board's circular dated 19.04.2006.
Feeling aggrieved by refusal of grant of benefit under 1989 Scheme, petitioners-appellants filed the writ petition. The Railway Board vide its letter dated 2nd of March, 2007 which is on record, informed that appellants' case was not covered under 2006 Scheme and applied the strip of land principle and held that there was no commitment to give employment to the land losers.
The learned Single Judge accepted the version of the Railway Board and dismissed the writ petition. Hence, this appeal.
Undisputedly, when the land for construction of railway line etc. was acquired in 1999, the Scheme of 1989 was in force 3 Patna High Court LPA No.1850 of 2012 (4) dt.06-12-2012 3/3 and that Scheme provided for employment to one member of each family of displaced person whose land was acquired. The circular dated 10.11.1989 as contained in Annexure-16 is available at page 66 of this appeal.
It appears that subsequently, in 2006 the Scheme was changed and the provision relating to providing employment to one person of each family of displaced person whose land was acquired, has been amended. Accordingly, the Railway Board rejected the claim of the appellants for providing employment to them.
It is crystal clear that appellants were entitled to the benefit of 1989 Scheme as the land was acquired in 1999 and in 1989 there was a scheme to provide employment to one person of each family of displaced person whose land had been acquired.
In the result, the appeal is allowed. The order of the learned Single Judge is set aside. The Railway Board-respondent is directed to provide employment to one member of each family of the displaced person whose land had been acquired in terms of the Scheme of 1989.
(Prakash Chandra Verma, J) B.T/-
(Jayanandan Singh, J)