JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J. — Leave granted.

2. Appellant calls in question legality of judgment rendered by a Division bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Jabalpur Bench. Background facts leading to filing of the appeal are as follows :

3. Respondent No.1 – Prem Kumar Sharma filed a writ Petition before the High Court claiming appointment on the ground that he was a land loser. High Court by its order dated 8.8.2001 directed consideration by the sub-Divisional Officer. Since the sub-Divisional officer held that he was entitled to employment, a writ petition was filed by the appellant before the High Court. The High Court held that since the land of the respondent No. 1 had been acquired, he was entitled for compensatory appointment. The High Court gave the following directions:

"The petitioner is directed to extend the employment to the son/defendant as the case may be of respondent no.3, within a period of twelve months from today, on availability of first vacancy with the petitioner.

In case no vacancy arises within the period, the petitioner shall create a post for the employment, in this regard."

4. Questioning correctness of the judgment, a Letters Patent Appeal was filed by t