JUDGMENT :

Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal arises from the judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Patna dated 3 January 2018 in a Letters Patent Appeal, [Letters Patent Appeal No. 1929/2016 in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 25313/2013].

3. The father of the appellant, Lalan Pandey, had constructed a two storied house together with a part of a third floor on Plot No. 1844, appurtenant to Khata No. 228, ad-measuring 0.06 acres, situated at Mauza-Pakri, Ara in the District of Sasaram in Bihar. The land over which the residential house was constructed was acquired in 2006 for the Ara-Sasaram Railway Project.

4. On 7 June 2008, the Collector Bhojpur, Ara submitted a list of persons displaced in consequence of the project undertaken by the Railways. The name of the appellant’s father occurred at serial no. 8 in the list of persons whose residential houses had been fully demolished. A communication was issued on 8 August 2008 by the Executive Engineer (Construction), East Central Railway, Ara to the Deputy Chief Engineer recommending the case of the appellant for appointment in service in terms of a policy circular of the Railway Board dated 19 April 2006.

5. Since the letter dated 7 August 2008 contains a statement of relevant facts, the letter is extracted below:-

“The house of Sh. Lalan Pandey s/o Late Ram Naresh Pandey of village Jagdeo Nagar, Pakri, Ara is coming centrally in the alignment of Ara-Sasaram New Railway line with following land details:

      The complete demolition of the house is required for construction of new line at this location.

Sh. Lalan Pandey s/o Late Ram Naresh Pandey has demolished about 90% part of the house constructed in a two kattha land with covered area approximate 1110 sq. feet. He had two-storied building with part construction in third story.

Sh. Lalan Pandey, s/o Late Ram Naresh Pandey is a completely displaced person due to construction of new line and his livelihood has suffered due to displacement. A report on assessment by DLAO/Ara office regarding size and facilities available at his demolished house is enclosed for reference.

Vide this office letter under reference above the application was forwarded for consideration for job in Railway as per the extant provisions.

His case may be considered for job in Railway in terms of Railway Board’s letter No. E(NG) II/2002/RC-5/4 dated 19.04.2006 (copy enclosed)”

6. Between 2008 and 2011, before he died, the appellant’s father had an exchange of correspondence with the authorities for requesting them that the benefit of the policy circular of 19 April 2006 be granted since his entire house had been demolished. After his father died on 15 May 2011, the appellant instituted a writ petition before the High Court, [Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4493/2012] seeking that relief.

7. After a counter affidavit was filed in the proceedings, the High Court by its order dated 11 December 2012 directed that the claim of the appellant should be considered by the General Manager, East Central Railways, Vaishali at Hazipur for the grant of Group ‘D’ employment within a period of three months.

8. The appellant then submitted a representation which was rejected by an order dated 20 February 2013. The reasons for the rejection were as follows:-

“(i) As per Annexure-1 (Railway Board Circular No. E(NG)II/2002/RC-5/4 dated 19.04.2006) “...no cognizance by way of offering employment to displaced persons should be given wherein only a strip of land for construction of a line has been acquired...”

(ii) In the impugned case a small piece of land measuring 0.06 acre only was acquired in the year 2006 vide Annexure-C (Case NO.01/2005-06). As such this does not conform to the requirement of above mentioned Board’s Circular to entitle the appl