C.K. THAKKER, LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA, JJ.
EASTERN COALFIELDS LTD. - APPELLANT
VERSUS
DUGAI KUMAR - RESPONDENT
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 245 OF 2004
DECIDED ON: 28-07-2008
Constitution of India-Article 133 - Appeal before Supreme Court - Order passed in review petition is under challenge and not the order passed in intra-court appeal - Appeal cannot be said to be not maintainable since the order passed in intra-court appeal got merged in the order of Review Petition. (Para 14)
Constitution of India - Article 226 - Delay of 10 years in filing the writ petition - Claim for release of coal of which petitioner was entitled against land acquired-Order passed on the statement of respondent-company that "usual order" could be passed-Similar orders passed in several matters-It. is appropriate to extend the benefit to the writ-petitioner.
(Para 21)
Constitution of India - Article 226 - Modification of the order based in writ petition-Order modified on mentioning the matter without any application for modification of earlier order - Not justified. (Para 25)
(1990)2 AC 738, 749=(1990)2 All ER 434, (1990) = WLR 1302, (1874)5 PC 221 = 22 WR 492, (1969)2 SCR 824, (1970)1 SCR 697, (2004)11 SCC 526, (1974)1 SCC 317, 1993 COD 344 - Referred to.
JUDGMENT
C.K. THAKKER, J.
1. This appeal is filed by the Eastern Coalfields Ltd. (`Company for short) against an order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta on January 28, 2002 dismissing Review Petition filed by the appellant herein.
2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is `Government Company under Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956. A scheme was formulated by the Company to offer employment to a person who is a land loser for 1 acre of land which has been acquired, purchased or used by the Company. Subsequently, the policy was changed and it was also provided that those who do not intend to get employment may be offered 800 Metric Tons (MTs) of coal in lieu of employment of a family member whose one acre of land has been acquired, purchased or used by the Company. The policy was again modified in 1996 and entitlement was increased to 1600 MTs.
3. It is the case of the Company that it purchased land of the respondent admeasuring 1.26 acres and registered sale deed No. 2006, dated February 17, 1989 was executed at Dhanbad. In the light of the policy then in vogue, the respondent was offered 1008 MTs of coal on the basis of 800 MTs per acre since the sale was for 1.26 acres of land. The respondent accepted the said decision on February 23, 1989 and a written communication was addressed to the General Manager stating therein that the land owner was not interested in getting employment and he would be thankful if 1008 MTs of coal would be given to him. The Authorities accepted the request and the appellant Company vide a letter dated May 22, 1989, passed an order to release 1008 MTs of steam Coal, Grade-D. It was stated that the coal would be released on fulfilling the terms and conditions mentioned in the said communication. According to the Company, everything was over and nothing further was required to be done in the matter. The respondent-writ-petitioner was paid consideration for land which was sold by registered sale deed. Over and above compensation, as per the policy in force, they offered 1008 MTs of coal which was accepted by the respondent and quantity was also released. It was accepted by the respondent without any protest, objection or reservation and the matter ended there.
4. After considerable delay of about a decade, a petition came to be filed being Writ Petition No. 770 of 1999 contending therein that writ petitioner (respondent herein) was entitled to additional quantity of 1008 MTs of coal and an appropriate direction be issued to the Company to release the goods. The writ petition was placed for `first hearing on September 6, 1999, and on the same day, it was disposed of by the Court observing inter alia that "no affidavit in opposition has been filed", and the learned counsel for the Company submitted that `usual order be passed in the matter. Accordingly, the Company was directed to allot "balance quantity of 1008 MTs" of coal to the writ-petitioner.
5. The said order read as under;
"Mr. D.P. Majumdar, Adv. with Mr. G. Patra, Adv. appears and submits.
Mr. A.K. Mitra, Adv. with Md. Iairsh, Adv. appears and submits.
The Court : No affidavit-in- opposition has been filed. The Learned Lawyer for the respondent submits that usual order may be passed in this matter. Accordingly, I passed the following order:-
The respondents are directed to allot balance quantity of 1008 M.T. to the petitioner in terms of the release order dated 25.5.1989 from Nayandanga Coliery, Mugma Area.
The writ petition is disposed of.
All parties are to act on a signed copy of the minutes of this order on the usual undertaking."
6. It is stated by the appellant-Company that after the order dated September 6, 1999, on September 13, 1999, again the matter was mentioned by the writ-petitioner without filing any application and the High Court modified its earlier order dated September 6, 1999 and the balance quantity which was mentioned in the earlier order of September 6, 1999 as 1008 MTs was enhanced to 68
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.