Altamas Kabir, C.J.

1. Although the matter started out as public interest litigation, during the course of submissions, innumerable affidavits were filed rendering the litigation adversarial in nature.

2. The writ petitioners claim to have filed the writ petition as a class action litigation by the tribal Chiefs of Rajmahal Pahar Bachao Andolan, Amla Pahad Block, Pakur District, Jharkhand and some Human Rights Organisations in the State of Jharkhand for enforcement and protection of the fundamental rights of the villagers of the said area as guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

3. According to the petitioners, out of 22 districts in the State of Jharkhand, 12 districts fully and 2 districts partially comprise Scheduled Areas. Some of the areas are covered by the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 and the Santhal Parganas Tenancy (Supplementary Provisions) Act, 1949, which are similar in nature. Furthermore the provisions of the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution and the provisions of the Panchayat (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA) also apply to these areas which have rich mineral deposits, including coal.

4. According to the petitioners, Parliament enacted the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 to enable the Union of India to acquire and develop land for coal mining purposes in addition to the provisions of the Land Acquisition-Act, 1894. It is the petitioners case that there has been a concerted attempt by the authorities to use the rich resources of the region for benefiting the State at the cost of the lives and the livelihood of the local population.

5. It is the further case of the petitioners that in the year 1988, a system of exploration for coal was commenced in and around the villages of Pachwara region by the Geological Survey of India, which is reported to have 562 MT coal reserves in an area measuring approximately 1300 hectares and comprising nine revenue villages whose inhabitants are essentially tribals.

6. According to the petitioners, land acquition notices have been issued in respect of a total area of 1704.69 acres, which has been notified for acquisition for the coal development project of Panem Coal Mines Limited. The break-up has been shown to include 640 hectares of raiyati land, 360 hectares of forest land, 2 hectares of home-stead land and some other lands comprising roads, nullas, rivers, bridges, etc. From the averments made in the writ petition, it appears that on 26th December, 2001, the Union of India in its Ministry of Coal and Mines, allotted 13 sq. kilometers of land in Pachwara Central Block to Punjab State Electricity Board for captive mining for supply of coal exclusively to the thermal power plant in the State of Punjab. The actual mining activity is to be carried out by Panem Coal Mines Limited, which has been made respondent No. 3 in the writ petition. It also appears from the averments in the writ petition that on 22nd February, 2002, the Union of India issued a notification specifying the supply of coal by Panem Coal Mines Limited for the Thermal Power Plant of the Punjab State Electricity Board.

7. According to the writ petitioners, when the said news was published in the local newspapers in the month of April, 2002, there was widespread protest and rallies by the villagers against the proposal because it would deprive them of their homes and ancestral properties.

8. While the said process was under way, the State Government issued several notifications dated 14th November, 2002 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 specifying lands comprising Panchwara Central Block for the purpose of acquisition. The notification for each village was published separately and notwithstanding the provisions of the Jharkhand Panchayat Act and its Extension to the Scheduled Areas as also the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution, the State of Jharkhand proceeded further to issue notifications under Section 6 of the aforesaid Act.

9