By the Court.—This special appeal arises from a judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 20 January 2016. The writ petition (Writ-A No. 46991 of 1999) filed by the appellant (and another) seeking a mandamus to the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) to provide appointment in pursuance of a Government Order dated 29 February 1996, has been dismissed.

2. The Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation (UPSIDC) acquired land in Village Lawain Khurd, Tehsil Karchhana, District Allahabad during the 1960’s for setting up of an industrial estate. In 1997, BPCL applied to UPSIDC for land to set up a LPG Bottling Plant in the industrial estate. An agreement was entered into on 21 October 1997 by which a plot of land admeasuring 27.50 acres was allotted to BPCL by UPSIDC. The lease deed between UPSIDC and BPCL contained the following condition:

“In employing labour for the unit, skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled, the allottee shall give preference to one or two able bodies persons from the families whose land has been acquired for the purpose of that Industrial Area.”

3. In pursuance of the aforesaid condition, BPCL in October 1997 requested the district authorities to apprise it of the names and addresses of persons who had lost their land. Accordingly, the Sub Divisional Magistrate on 6 June 1999 forwarded a list of nineteen clusters/group of families whose lands had been acquired, treating them as project affected persons. BPCL was to consider the nominees from each cluster/group of families for employment, subject to their meeting the required criteria of eligibility for employment and suitability. On 7 August 1999, a letter was addressed by BPCL to those project affected families calling upon them to nominate a member of the family. The eligibility criteria prescribed was as follows :

Educational    Min 7th std. Pass

Qualification Min. 18 years Max

Age as on      1.8.1999 30 years        (to be relaxed by 5         years) for SC/ST candidates and by 3     years for OBC can       didates.

Nominee should be a blood relation of the land losers such as:

(a) Self

(b) Son

(c) Grand-son (son’s son).”

      4. The land losers/nominees were required to present themselves before the Joint Development Commissioner, Naini on 23 August 1999 together with an affidavit indicating the details of the land acquired, compensation received and other details. An affidavit was filed on behalf of the appellant and his co-petitioner on 21 August 1999. The appellant was not found to be eligible for appointment, inter alia, on the ground that as on 1 August 1999, he was thirty four years and seven months of age on the cut-off date for screening which was 1 August 1999 (the date of birth of the appellant being 6 December 1964). This led to the filing of a writ petition. The learned Single Judge has followed the law laid down by a Full Bench of this Court in Ravindra Kumar v. District Magistrate, Agra, 2005 (1) UPLBEC 118, in holding that there was no vested right on the part of the family whose land had been acquired to claim appointment in the service of the fourth respondent. Dealing with the contention of the appellant that the appellant was entitled to be considered in pursuance of the condition contained in the lease agreement between UPSIDC and BPCL, the learned Single Judge held that the minimum criteria of eligibility which was prescribed was neither under challenge nor could it be said to be unreasonable. The case of the appellant was duly examined in terms of the criteria and the appellant was held not to fulfill the prescribed norms. Moreover, the learned Single Judge held that since the land was acquired in 1968 and a period of more than forty five years have elapsed, the object of granting appointment in lieu of acquisition of land may not survive anymore. Hence, the writ petition has been dismissed.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant urges that -

(i) The judgment