IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
DHANESHWARI – Appellant
Versus
SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED – Respondent
WPS/3784/2022
##PAGE1##
1
D byig Sit Ia Dll Dy H s Aig Nn Ted 2026:CGHC:22440
SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR
TAMRAKAR D 20a 2te 6: .05.13
17:57:49
+0530
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 3784 of 2022
• Dhaneshwari D/o Pyare Lal Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Gevra Basti,
Kusmunda, Tehsil- Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.)
... Petitioner
versus
1. South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through Chairman-Cum-Managing Director,
South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, Bilaspur (C.G.)
2. Director (Personnel), South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Head Quarter, Seepat
Road, Bilaspur (C.G.)
3. Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Dipka Area, District
Korba (C.G.)
4. General Manager (Mining), Dipka Extension Project, South Eastern Coalfields
Limited, Dipka Area, District Korba (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner : Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Advocate
For Respondents : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Bajpai, Advocate
Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board
13/05/2026
1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-
“10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the
entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioner.
10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the
impugned order dated 16.02.2022 (Annexure P-1) issued by
the respondent no. 4.
10.3 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the
respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for
grant of employment in lieu of her land acquired by the
respondents as per nomination.
##PAGE2##2
10.4 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deems
fit and proper may also be awarded to the petitioner including
the cost of the petition.”
2. The Central Government had initiated land acquisition proceedings in the year
2004 for extension of Dipka Project of the respondent/SECL. The lands of
village Malgaon Tehsil- Katghora District Korba was acquired by the Central
Government under the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development)
Act, 1957 (in short CBA Act) for the Dipka Expansion Coal Mines Project of
Dipka Area SECL. In this regard for the said acquisition a notification u/s 4 of
the C.B.A. Act, 1957 was issued on 12.02.2001 and notification u/s 7 of the
C.B.A. Act, 1957 was issued on 17.02.2004 and notification u/s 9 of the C.B.A.
Act, 1957 was issued on 24.11.2004 by the Central Government and those
notifications were published in the official gazette.
Upon publication of the notification in the official gazette u/s 9 of the
said Act, the land and right over the land vested absolutely with the Central
Government, free from all encumbrances. In terms of Section 11 of the above
Act, the above referred land and right vested with the company i.e. S.E.C.L.
It was agreed by the SECL to provide employment to one of the family
members of each land oustee as per the Rehabilitation Policy of 1991 issued by
the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh. However, subsequently employment
was offered according to the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy of Coal
India Limited, 2012 and authorities failed to consider claims of land oustees
according to Rehabilitation Policy of 1991, which was prevalent at the time of
land acquisition. According to the Policy of 2012, the land oustees having land
less than 2 acres would not be entitled to get employment.
##PAGE3##3
The petitioner as such preferred WPS No. 6243/2021 which was
disposed of by the High Court directing the respondents to consider the claim
of the petitioner in accordance with rules, regulations and policy governing the
field.
The application/representation of the petitioner has been rejected by the
SECL authorities. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking a direction to
the respondent authorities to provide employment according to the
Rehabilitation Policy of 1991, which was in existence at the time of land
acquisition. The petitioner has also sought relief to quash the order passed by
the SECL authorities, whereby his claim has been rejected.
3. Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner woul
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.