By filing this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:-

"for issuance of appropriate Writ/Writs, order/orders, direction/directions commanding the Respondents Railway Authorities to consider claim of Petitioners regarding Employment of Petitioner NO.2 against the Petitioner’s land situated at Mouza Ramjari, Thana Kolebira, Khata No.36, Plot No.1605, District Simdega (Earlier Ranchi District) Area 9.56 acres, which was acquired for the purpose of Railway in the year 1962 but till date only monitary compensation has been paid to the Petitioner’s family but Compensation by way of Employment has not been provided to the family of petitioners.

AND Petitioner further prays for issuance of appropriate Writ/Writs, order/orders, direction/directions commanding the Respondent Railway Authorities to give Employment to Petitioner NO.2 against the Petitioner’s land situated at Mouza Ramjari, Thana Kolebira, Khata No.36, Plot No.1605, District Simdega (Earlier Ranchi District) Area 9.56 acres, which was acquired for the purpose of Railway in the year 1962 but till date only monitory compensation has been paid to the Petitioner’s family but Compensation by way of Employment has not been provided to the family of petitioners and as per Article 300A of Constitution of India Respondents have no power to acquired land of any person without paying full compensation to the person, therefore till date Respondents have not mutated the name of Railway for the acquired land and till date mutation has been running in the name of Md. Idris i.e. father of petitioner No.1."

2. Heard learned counsel representing the petitioners and learned counsel representing the respondents.

3. The petitioners in this writ petition claims employment of petitioner No.2 in lieu of compensation against the acquired land.

4. Learned counsel representing the respondents submits that the land had been acquired in the year 1962. He further submits that petitioner No.2 was not even born while acquisition took place.

5. In the matter of land acquisition, where the land was acquired three decades earlier, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjeev Kumar Vs. State of Haryana & Ors. (Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.30798/2025), has held that employment cannot be claimed in a matter of land acquisition and a person will only be entitled for the compensation.

6. Admittedly, the petitioner No.2 - Abdullah Ahmad, was not even born when the land was acquired in the year 1962 and admittedly, the compensation has been paid. Now, in the year 2026, the petitioner No.2 is claiming employment in lieu of acquisition, which is absolutely an irrational claim.

7. With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands dismissed