Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Eastern Coalfields Limited vs Sk.Nasiruddin And Others on 19 May, 2011
Author: Asim Kumar Ray
Bench: Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, Asim Kumar Ray
1
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
F.M.A. No. 1005 of 2010
M.A.T. No. 42 of 2010
W.P.No. 17823(W) of 2005
Present :
The Hon'ble Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta
And
The Hon'ble Justice Asim Kumar Ray
Eastern Coalfields Limited
Versus
Sk.Nasiruddin and others
For the Appellant : Mr. R.N.Majumdar
Mr. Susanta Paul
Mr. Partha Basu
Mr. Nikhil Ray
For the Respondent : Mr. Pijush Chaturbedi
No. 1 Mr. T.K.Mukhopadhyay
Mr. A.K.Ghosal
Judgment On : 19.5.2011.
Asim Kumar Ray, J.
This appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 21st October, 2009 passed in W.P. No. 17823(W) of 2005 by the Hon'ble First Court. 2
The brief background of the matter is that respondent /petitioner Sk. Nasiruddin's father Sk. Rabbani since deceased and his aunt Golabjan Bibi were the joint owners of a land measuring 1.15 acres appertaining to Plot No. 3188 , Khatian No. 302 , J.L. No. 43 of mouza Majiwara ,District-Burdwan. Appellant /respondent No. 4 Eastern Coalfields Limited (hereinafter to be referred to as Company) started extracting coal from the said land from 9.8.1972 and as a result the land became unfit for cultivation. Whilst the land was in possession of the company on or about October 21, 1986 a deed of conveyance was executed by Rabbani and Golabjan Bibi and thereby the said land was transferred absolutely in favour of the appellant. Thus the two persons lost their land for cause of the appellant. A scheme was prepared for providing employment to the landlosers. There was provisions in the scheme that one employment was to be given to a land loser or his nominee if minimum of one acre land owned by him was purchased or acquired or used by the company during the period from 3rd September, 1975 to 12th August, 1983. Rabbani being eligible for employment in the company applied for employment in the year 1991. His appointment was approved by the competent authority by a letter dated January 15/17 of 1996. But in the pre-employment medical examination Rabbani was found unfit.
3
Thereafter Rabbani requested the company to consider his nominee Nasiruddin being the respondent herein for employment under the scheme. In response to the request the Personnel Manager , Sripur area issued a letter dated August 4/6 of 1998 asking the agent, Girimint ( R ) Colliery to forward necessary papers for sending them to the competent authority. On 18-6-1994 the appellant issued fresh norms for employment to the landlosers.
Since nothing tangible was forthcoming in spite of processing candidature of the respondent he moved this Court by filing writ petition being No. 12701(W) of 2003. The said writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 1-9-2003 directing the Personnel Manager (IC) of the company to take decision with reason in the matter. In compliance with the said order the personnel manager passed order holding that the respondent's prayer was not legally sustainable as the total quantum of land lost by the predecessor of the respondent does not cover 2.00 acres in terms of recent norms as above.
Being aggrieved by that reasoned decision Respondent herein filed writ petition being No. 17823(W) of 2005. The Hon'ble First Court has disposed of the writ petition by passing the impugned order.
Mr. Majumdar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant/ECL contended that the land originally belonged to Ijuddin, father of Rabbani. Rabbani 4 preferred a claim for employment under the scheme as nominee of his father which did not materialize as he was medically unfit. The respondent, Nasiruddin is the nominee of Rabbani. The claim of Nasiruddin could not be considered as he was nominee's nominee. He has further contended that the requirement of the scheme was that at least two acres of land owned by the landloser was purchased or acquired or taken for use by the appellant between 3-9-1975 and 12-8-1983. In the instant case only 1.5 acres of land was purchased and/or taken for use. That too was owned by Rabbani's father. Therefore, the reasoned order passed by the Personnel Manager (IC) of the company does not suffer from any illegality. The Hon'ble trial Court without considering the norms now prevailing has passed impugned order.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf respondent/petitioner, Nasiruddin has contended highlighting the fact above that Rabbani applied for the employment in terms of the scheme. The appellant decided to employ him under the scheme unfortunately, he was found medically unfit for employment. The respondent/petitioner being the nominee applied for the employment under the said scheme. Like Rabbani's case it was processed . But no decision was taken. Hence having noticed inaction the respondent moved this Court by filing a writ application which was disposed of giving a direction to the Personnel Manager (IC) for disposal of the representation of Nasiruddin. The representation of Nasiruddin was disposed 5 of without taking into consideration of the guidelines issued by the company. The guidelines were that the nominee should be near relations or be dependant to the landloser and he should be lineal descendant of the landloser. It is his further contention that the scheme was formulated to give an appointment to the landloser and in absence of the landloser to his nominee. The petitioner was the nominee of Rabbani. Therefore, the order impugned does not suffers from any illegality.
We have heard contention and rival contentions of the parties and noted the material placed before us.
It is an admitted fact that the land appertaining to Mouza Majiwara, Plot No. 3188, Khatian No. 302 , J.L.No. 43 measuring 1.15 acres belonged to respondent's predecessor-in-interest. It is not disputed that appellant started using this land for extracting coal from 9-8-1972 consequently the land became unfit for cultivation. It is also an admitted fact that a deed of conveyance in favour of the appellant was executed by the petitioner's predecessor-in-interest transferring the said land on 21- 10-1986.
It is evident from the record that petitioner's father Rabbani applied for an employment in the year 1991 and his appointment was approved by the competent authority vide letter dated January 15/17 of 1996 but in the medical examination Rabbani was declared unfit and he thereafter requested the company to consider his son/nominee the petitioner Nasiruddin for employment under the scheme. The 6 request of Rabbani was accepted , and application of Nasiruddin was processed by the company. Accordingly a letter dated August 4/6 of 1998 asking the Agent, Girimint ( R ) Colliery was written by the Personnel Manager (IC) , Sripur area with a request to send the necessary papers for sending them to the competent authority to whom the proposal for petitioner's (Nasiruddin) appointment had already been forwarded for approval.
Annexure P-2 at page 30 the check list being clearly mentioned for employment under landloser scheme in respect of Sk. Nasiruddin. Reference No. is GM/SA/C- 60/16/98/2789 dated 4/6-8-1998. On perusal of the said check list , it appears that the name of the land owners were Sk. Rabbani and Golabjan Bibi. They were heirs and son of late Sk. Ijuddin . Name of the nominee was Sk. Nasiruddin i.e. respondent . The quantum of land purchased was 1.15 acre by deed No. 5298 dated 21-10-1986 out of total 3.15 acre.. It appears from checklist being Annexure P-6 to the Writ Petition (at page 39 of the Paper book) entire plot measuring 3.15 acres used for coal extraction and consequently damaged so much so it was rendered unfit for cultivation. The period of above use from 9th August 1972 to 30th June 1976. The date of use of land was from 9-8-1972 to 30-6-1976. This check list for employment of Sk. Nasiruddin under landloser scheme was accepted and duly processed by the 7 competent authority of the company. The eligibility for determining a candidate's appointment in landloser scheme at page 42 is that ----
A. For the land purchased /acquired/used between period from 3-9-1975 to 12-8- 1983.
A.(i). Minimum one acre of land is required for one employment and in case of more than 3 acres maximum 2 employment from a family. If any person is employed earlier under L.L. Scheme that should be taken into account for determining eligibility of employment.
A.(iii) The nominee should be near relation and be dependant to the land loser upper age limit is 35 years and should be physically fit on medical examination. B.(ii). The nominee should be lineal descendants of the landloser, of upper age limit 35 years and medically fit.
The case which is in our hand indicates that Eastern Coalfields Limited started using the land in questions since 9-8-1972 and it was used upto 30-6-1976. Therefore, the eligibility criteria coming within point (A) is fulfilled. This scheme says that the nominee should be near relations and be dependant to the landloser. Respondent Nasiruddin is the grandson of Ijuddin and son of Rabbani. He is also the nephew of Golabjan Bibi. Thus he is lineal descendants of landloser and he is eligible nominee within the above scheme. . Therefore his case is well within the demand of point nos. A(iii) and B.(ii) of the requirement of the eligibility. Even 8 going by the quantum of land used and damaged this landloser could have claimed two employment.
It has been rightly pointed out by the Hon'ble first trial Court that the Personnel Manager totally ignored the provisions of the guideline dated June 18,1994 providing that an employment would be provided to a person from whom a minimum of 1.00 acre of land was purchased or acquired or taken by the company for use between period from 3-9-1975 and 12-8-1983. It is an admitted position that Rabbani's case was considered on the basis that from him and his co-sharer the company took 3.15 acres of land and started using it from 9-8-1972 and that it continued to be in possession of the land till the October 21, 1986 when it purchased 1.5 acres of land. The right of employment of the landloser or his nominee to be treated as approved once the company took the land and started using it for extracting coal. The respondent/writ petitioner's case was a case of nominee's nominee as contended belatedly by Mr. Majumdar is wholly misplaced. It was neither taken at the time of passing of the reasoned order by the Personnel Manager (IC), Eastern Coalfields Limited nor taken before the Hon'ble First Court. The reasoned decision is based on the requirement of two acres of land in terms of later notification which cannot operate respectively. The said decision was taken ignoring previous guideline noted abovewhich was in vogue.
9
Taking all these backgrounds in mind, we hold that the order impugned does not suffer from any illegality calling for interference.
The appeal stands dismissed.
Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
There will be stay of operation of this judgment till 5th July, 2011.
I agree (Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J. ) (Asim Kumar Ray, J. )