Chattisgarh High Court
Union Of India vs Umavatee on 12 October, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPS No. 6364 of 2022
1. Union of India Through The General Manager, S.E.C. Railway,
Bilaspur Zone, Headquarters Office, Bilaspur 495004 Chhattisgarh.
2. The Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer S.E.C. Railway, Bilaspur
Division, DRM'S Office, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 495004.
3. The Chief Project Manager Rail Vikas Nigam Limited Project Office,
Block No.5, Maruti Business Park, G.E. Road, Raipur- 492013
Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioners
Versus
Umavatee D/o Shri Rai Singh Meshram Aged About 21 Years
Unemployed, R/o Village Patarkoni, Police Station Gourella, Tehsil
Pendra Road, District : Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioners : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Deputy Solicitor General
Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Judge
Order on Board
Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice
12.10.2022
Heard Mr. Ramakant Mishra, learned Deputy Solicitor General for
the petitioners.
2. The defects pointed out by the Registry that Annexure P/2 and
Annexure P/3 are not easily readable, is ignored as Mr. Mishra submits
that this case is squarely covered by the judgment dated 08.04.2022
passed in Writ Petition (S) No.2480 of 2022 (Union of India and Others v.
Shishupal Gaurkhede and Others) and accordingly, he submits that this
writ petition may be disposed of in the light of the said order.
3. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 24.03.2022
passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench,
Jabalpur, (for short, the CAT) in Original Application No.203/65/2022, by
which the CAT directed the petitioners to consider the case of the
applicant before the CAT for appointment within a period of three months.
4. The applicant before the CAT is grandson of ancestors, whose land
was acquired for the purpose of extension of broad-gauge railway lines
from Salka Road to Anuppur. The petitioners had a policy for giving
appointment to sole owner of land or son/daughter/husband/wife of the
sole owner, whose land or a portion thereof was acquired for the project.
5. In the order dated 08.04.2022 passed in Writ Petition (S) No.2480
of 2022, at paragraphs-4 to 6, it was observed as follows :
"4. The learned CAT relied on its earlier judgment in
case of Yashvant Kumar v. Union of India (Original
Application No.203/929/2014), decided on 28.11.2017,
which was affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court
in Writ Petition (S) No.1349 of 2018 (South East
Central Railway and Others v. Yashvant and Others),
decided on 03.04.2018, and accordingly, issued the
directions as noted hereinabove.
5. It is pointed by Mr. Mishra that against the judgment
of this Court dated 03.04.2018 passed in Writ Petition
(S) No.1349 of 2018, a Special Leave Petition was
filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which is
pending consideration.
6. As the Division Bench of this Court in Writ
Petition (S) No.1349 of 2018 had held that a grandson
was entitled to be appointed on rehabilitation ground
due to extension of railway route, we see no good
ground to interfere with the order of the learned CAT."
6. In view of the above submission of Mr. Mishra and in view of the
order dated 08.04.2022 passed in Writ Petition (S) No.2480 of 2022, the
writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No cost.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Arup Kumar Goswami) (Sanjay Agrawal)
Chief Justice Judge
Anu
