Kumar Ban Goswami vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2026 Latest Caselaw 124 Chatt

******* It is submitted that in the earlier round of litigation, this Court

had specifically directed NTPC to consider the case of one member

of each displaced family for employment in terms of Clause 7.1 of the

CG R&R Policy and, in case employment was not available, to

extend alternative rehabilitation package. In compliance of the said

direction, NTPC duly considered the claim of the petitioners and

issued certificates dated 23.09.2012 certifying that there was surplus

manpower in the non-executive cadre and therefore employment

could not be provided.

******* Learned counsel would submit that upon such certification,

NTPC extended comprehensive alternative rehabilitation benefits to

the petitioners in lieu of employment. The benefits included monetary

compensation in place of annuity, maintenance grants, self-

settlement amounts, allotment of vegetable and medical shops,

award of contracts to the Project Affected Persons' Society, hiring of

vehicles belonging to the petitioners' family members, and allotment

of residential plots in the rehabilitation colony. It is submitted that the

value of contracts and benefits extended to the petitioners and their

family members runs into several crores of rupees.

******* It is further contended that the petitioners have not only

accepted the entire rehabilitation package but have also executed an

undertaking agreeing not to raise any further claims in respect of the

land acquisition and rehabilitation benefits. Having availed and

enjoyed the benefits for several years, the petitioners are now

estopped from seeking employment as an additional benefit.

******* Learned counsel would argue that the present petition is

barred by the principles of res judicata and constructive res judicata,

as the very same issue of employment was raised, considered and

adjudicated in the earlier writ petition. The petitioners cannot be

permitted to re-agitate an issue which has attained finality.

******* It is further submitted that the CG R&R Policy does not confer

an absolute or vested right to employment. The policy only provides

for consideration of employment and, in the event of non-availability,

alternative rehabilitation measures. The direction of this Court in the

earlier judgment has been fully complied with in letter and spirit.

******* Learned counsel would also submit that no mandamus can be

issued directing NTPC to create posts or provide employment where

none exists. The determination regarding availability of posts falls

within the administrative domain of the employer, and this Court, in

exercise of writ jurisdiction, cannot compel creation of employment.

******* On the aforesaid grounds, learned counsel for Respondent

No. 5 prays that the writ petition be dismissed with costs as being

devoid of merit and amounting to abuse of the process of law.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records

annexed with the present writ petition.

7. The primary issue that arises for consideration is whether the

petitioners, whose lands were acquired and who have admittedly

received compensation and rehabilitation benefits, can still seek a

writ of mandamus directing Respondent No. 5 to grant permanent

employment to one member of each displaced family.

8. From the record, it is evident that the claim for employment was

raised by the petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 692 of 2012. This Court, by

order dated 19.09.2012, directed Respondent No. 5 to consider the

case of one member of each displaced family for employment in

terms of Clause 7.1 of the CG R&R Policy and, if employment was

not available, to extend alternative rehabilitation package. Pursuant

thereto, Respondent No. 5 issued certificates stating that surplus

manpower existed in the non-executive cadre and employment could

not be granted. Thereafter, alternative rehabilitation benefits were

extended and accepted by the petitioners.

9. Clause 11.2.1 to 11.2.3 of the Rehabilitation Scheme-2007 of the

Chhattisgarh State issued by the notification on 15-05-2008, provided

that:-

"11.2 Industrial Mining projects:

11.2.1 In case of Mega Industrial power

generation and extraction projects affected

area would be remarked. It would be

essential on part order dated proposing

institution/establishment to execute

development plans for that area. To serve

this purpose, prescribed percentage of net

profit of the institution per year (1-3/ as

required) will be allotted/made expenditure

between Administrative department of State

Government and the concerned institution

by considering special condition.

11.2.2 Project affected farmers irregular,

casual employment of wages will not be

considered as alternative means of

subsistence or employment. There will be

given following priority in respect of

complying provisions of employment to

eligible inhabitants in projects regular posts

in industrial policy:-

(i) Project affected person.

(ii) Another person residing in Project

affected area.

(iii) Another person residing in the

state.

11.2.3 If employment is not provided

(earlier in construction work of project &

after starting of project in project itself)

within two years from the date of acquiring

land by industrial and mining project

executing institution then ane member of

each family, who is eligible for employment

shall be given that much amount which

would be equal to what he gets from

employment or the amount to be paid

under rozgaar guarantee plan, whatever is

more, will be paid to him without work until

regular employment is not arranged for

him."

10. In the W.P.C. No. 692 of 2012, which has been filed by the present

petitioners, the learned coordinate bench of this Court has

considered the rehabilitation package in its order dated 19.09.2012,

and quoted the Clause-7 of the CG Rehabilitation Model Policy, and

also the offer of the respondent/NTPC and direction. Para 37 to 42 of

the order dated 19.09.2012 is necessary to reproduce here, which

reads as under:-

"Rehabilitation package :-

37. Clause 7 of the CG R&R Model Policy framed

by the State Government of Chhattisgarh

provides for employment and other facilities,

which reads as under:

7. Employment and other facilities: 7.1.

Such displaced family will be eligible for

employment who has been land owner or

lease holder of acquired land

undependably or jointly three year prior to

the date of publication of Notification under

section 4 of land acquisition act.

An one member of such displaced family

providing employment shall be made

agreement whose more than 75% of the

land is acquired for commercial project and

whose land is acquired for industrial/mining

project, one member of affected families

will be provided employment as per their

eligibility and appropriateness.

(a) At the time of providing employment at

project work displaced family will be given

priority.

(b) The eligible educated young people

shall be made arrangement of training to

provide them better employment in project

as per their education qualification.

(c) In the project of Govt.

Department/public under taking shall be

relaxed for 2 years in the appointment on

grade III post.

(d) Displaced family in the project shall be

made special arrangement to provide

necessary transiting to make availability of

beneficiary work to them.

(d) Training of Fishermen will be provided

to flood affected area. If there is given

opportunity of fishermen in the project then

society of affected people/fishermen will be

preferred for tender ship.

(e) The priority of employment shall be

given in following order :-

(i) Whose 100% of agricultural land

and house is acquired.

(ii) Whose 100% of agricultural land

is acquired.

(iii) Whose more than 75% of

agricultural land is acquired.

(iv) Whose more than 50% of

agricultural land is acquired.

(v) Whose more than 25% of

agricultural land is acquired.

(vi) Other displaced family.

(G) If opportunity of regular employment in

Commercial/Industrial/Mining project and

Allied work is less than number of

displaced families, then in that condition

following alternatives shall be provided for

them: -

(1) One member of displaced family

will be given a shop (as he wants) in

projects area adjacent to that or near

block head office or in the area of

Nagar Panchayat /Municipality.

Company will bear all the

expenditure. In head office of the

Janpad Panchayat/Nagar

Panchayat/Municipality area

company will be allotted land on the

basis of sale rates by the collector.

After constructing shop company will

be allotted them to the displaced.

(2) Such displaced family who have

an alternative of self employment in

transport business whether it is

related to the carriage of product or

raw material use in project or

passenger transport they will be

given priority in transport constructs

of project by the institution and to

serve the purpose transport vehicle

will be made available for them.

Those member of displaced families who

are eligible for getting employment in

projects but do not possess any

necessary/required technical qualification,

then in that condition they shall be made to

train them as per their educational

qualification by concerned institution in

case of big projects and in other case by

govt. department/institution training will be

arranged independably or by using

available training facilities of state govt., as

case may be:

7.3. Project affected other people specially

land less people will be given training by

the govt. dept. to develop new skills in them

and they shall be endeavored to provide

them employment in small project. Those

persons will be provided wok in such

project generated /created by the State

Government.

7.4. Displaced families shall be endeavored

made to give privilege by marking them for

self employment rooted plans

(development of dairy, poultry, fisheries,

short college industry etc.) to be executed

by the state govt. and by making loan

arrangements for them from financial

agencies.

7.5. Government projects like Irrigation

projects, Road projects, School projects or

Hospital project is Public welfare projects.

After there is no opportunity of employment

there so there is no need to given

employment to govt. projects displaced

people but they shall be made legitimate

provision for giving priority in employment

in Government/Semi government

Organization establishment.

7.6. The self help groups working in project

area will be taken to join them to the

activities/work in industries. To serve this

purpose steps will be taken for organizing

workshop /training by the concern

Department /establishment."

38. The respondent No.4 has offered the

rehabilitation package to the petitioners as under:

"An amount of Rs.3.86 crore is being paid

to the petitioners and family members, out

of which Rs.2.66 crores already deposited

with the State and balance amount will be

paid directly to the petitioners and family.

Besides the above following additional

benefits were offered to the petitioners:

(i) 5 vehicles of Kumar Ban and his

family would be hired on priority in

NTPC.

(ii) 2 vegetable shops will be allotted

in the township.

(iii) 1 medical shop will be allotted in

township.

(iv) Contract to their society (Project

Affected Person Society) on single

tender basis.

(v) 7 plots measuring 14000 sq. in

rehabilitation colony, Gopalpur.

(vi) Kumar Ban and family will be

temporarily accommodated in the

Gopalpur community centre available

with NTPC, till they construct their

houses in the plots offered.

XXX XXX XXX

XXX XXX XXX

XXX XXX XXX

That, besides other compensation,

the respondent is also granting

compensation of R&R grant in lieu of

annuity and subsistence allowance to

the petitioners in the following

manner:

S.N.          Name       Area (in   R&R    Subsistence
                         Acres) (Annuity)    (In Rs.)
                                  (In Rs.)
 1.      Kumar Ban                6.63    19,89,000         85,400
         Goswami
 2.      Vijay Pal                6.85    20,55,000         85,400
         Ban
 3.      Rishi Ban                8.18    24,54,000         85,400
         Goswami
 4.      Rajendra                 6.63    19,89,000         85,400
         Ban
         Goswami
 5.      Rupendra                 0.37     2,50,000         85,400
         Ban
         Goswami

39. The CG R&R Policy provides for grant of

employment three years prior to the date of

publication of notification under Section 4 of the

Act, 1894. It is further provided that priority should

be given to one member of each displaced family

in providing employment. Training should be

given and also make necessary arrangements for

providing the facility for higher education. There

should be two years age relaxation in the

appointment on Grade III post.

40. Clause (G) of the CG R&R Policy provides,

inter alia, if regular employment in

Commercial/Industrial/Mining project and Allied

work is less than number of displaced families,

then the alternatives shall be provided for them,

wherein, member of displaced family will be given

a shop on his choice. Shop has to be constructed

by the company.

41. The offer of the respondent No.4/NTPC for

rehabilitation nowhere indicates that the

respondent No.4 has considered the members of

the displaced families for employment and since

availability was less than the employment

available, alternatives were offered to them.

42. Accordingly, the respondent No.4 is directed,

in addition to what has been offered, to consider

granting employment to one member of the each

displaced family and if the same is not available,

a proper certificate be issued. Before granting

alternative rehabilitation package to one member

of each displaced family, in lieu of employment,

they should be given discretion for choosing a

shop. It cannot be on the basis of company's

decision."

11. In the order dated 19.09.2012, the learned coordinate bench of this

Court ordered that:-

"45. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, it is

ordered as under:

I. For grant of higher compensation to the

petitioners for acquiring the land in dispute,

the petitioners may take recourse to the

provisions of Section 18 of the Act, 1894 for

reference to the District Court.

II. It is directed that except granting a shop,

in lieu of employment, all other

rehabilitation package of the respondent

No.4/NTPC be complied with forthwith.

III. The respondent No.4/NTPC is directed

to consider one member of the each

displaced family for employment as per

clause 7.1 of the CG R&R Policy and if the

employment is not available, alternative

rehabilitation package to one member of

each displaced family shall be provided, in

view of clause 7.1 of the CG R&R Policy.

IV. The petitioners are continuing in the

land in dispute, as this Court by order dated

8.5.2012 had directed that "if the petitioners

are in possession of the property in

question, there shall be no dispossession

of the petitioners. Therefore, it is directed

that till the compensation is paid,

rehabilitation package is settled and the

displaced families of the petitioners

constructed their houses on the plots

allotted to them, the petitioners, as offered

by the respondent No.4, shall be provided

temporary accommodation in the Gopalpur

Community Centre.

V. The respondent No.4 is further directed

to make necessary arrangements for

transportation of the belongings of the

petitioners and their family members from

the present place to the newly established

place for their temporary accommodation

with other day-to-day requirements."

12. In compliance with para 42 of the order dated 19.09.2012, passed in

W.P.C. No. 692/2012, the respondent NTPC has issued a certificate

on 23.09.2012 that the employment to the petitioner could not be

provided as there is surplus manpower and suitable vacancies are

not available. The relevant part of the certificate dated 23.09.2012

(annexure P-7) is reproduced hereinbelow:-

"Pursuant to Clause No.41/42 of the judgment

passed by the Honorable High Court of

Chattisgarh, Bilaspur on 19 September, 2012, in

the Writ Petition (C) No.692 of 2012. Sh.Kumar

Ban Goswami & Others Vis State of Chattisgarh

& Others, NTPC Korba examined the availability

of vacancies in non-executives category and

found that the existing manpower in the aforesaid

category is surplus. It is therefore regret to

inform/certify that we are not able to provide

employment in NTPC Korba due to non-

availability of suitable vacancies at the moment."

13. Subsequently, the petitioners have filed a Contempt Case No.

428/2013, which has been disposed of on 19.09.2014 with the

observation that:-

"11. In the light of the submissions made by

counsel for the petitioners as well as

respondents, the only issues which now remain to

be complied with are as under:-

a. that as per the undertaking No.1 now

that the petitioners have given requisite

papers/documents in respect of the 4

vehicles of the family members of Kumar

Ban Goswami, the respondents would be

hiring them on priority basis within a

reasonable period.

b. As far as awarding contract to the society

is concerned, again counsel for

respondents have given a categorical

undertaking before the court that the

moment the society of the petitioners would

provide their ESIC as well as EPF code,

they would be provided the contract on

priority basis on Single Tender Basis.

c. Further as far as undertaking No.5 is

concerned, since the respondents have

already offered the petitioners 7 plots of

2000 sq.ft each at Khasra No.13/2 at

village Gopalpur, Tahsil Khatgora, the

petitioners are directed to approach

respondent No.3/the Collector, Distt. Korba

in respect of the same and counsel for

respondent No.3 & 4 also makes a

submission that he shall ensure that

necessary information with regard to the

orders passed by the contempt court would

be communicated to the Collector, Korba

towards compliance of the order. The said

7 plots of 2000 Sq.ft at Khasra No.13/2 at

village Gopalpur, Tahsil Khatgora are also

acceptable to the counsel appearing for the

petitioners and respondents No.3 & 4 shall

take necessary decision on the same

immediately by informing the Collector for

allotting the said land to the petitioners.

******* Both the counsels agree that if the

petitioners approach the office of Collector,

Korba on a specific date, the same shall be

processed at the earliest. In the light of the

same, the petitioners shall appear before

the Collector Korba on 15.10.14 on which

date the Collector should make all

endeavor to honour the order passed by

this Court by allotting seven plots to the

petitioners in Khasra No.13/2 at village

Gopalpur, Tahsil Khatgora.

d. Since there is specific undertaking by

respondents No.3 & 4 that if the petitioners

want they can immediately take sanction as

per the undertaking given by respondent

No.3. The petitioners are directed to

approach respondent No.2 on 22.9.14. It is

expected that respondent No.2 shall issue

necessary instructions of providing them

accommodation at the Community Center,

Gopalpur as per the undertaking given

before the Writ Court,

e. As regards the difference of amount

which has arrived at 4.99 lacs, the

petitioners shall approach respondent No.2

towards clarification about the wrong

calculation arrived at by respondent No.2,

respondent No.2 would be duty bound to

inform the petitioners as to how they are

not entitled to Rs. 4.99 lacs so far as

unpaid amount is concerned."

14. On 22.09.2025, the respondent NTPC has filed the additional facts

on record of the present case and in para 7 to 14, the benefit under

the rehabilitation policy extended to the petitioners has been

disclosed. It is also necessary to notice here the said facts, which

reads as under:-

"7. That, in compliance with the order dated

19.09.2012 passed in WPC No. 692/2012, the

answering Respondent was required to hire 5

vehicles of Shri Kumar Ban and his family

members. However, in order to extend greater

benefit, the answering Respondent/NTPC has in

fact hired 10 vehicles instead of 5. Out of these, 8

vehicles are being operated on a regular basis

and 2 vehicles are engaged on need basis. It is

pertinent to mention that the contract value of the

said work is more than Rs.56,84,53,928 (for the

period 2012-2025). Copy of the details of 10

vehicles along with the total work award and the

current award is filed herewith and marked as

ANNEXURE R-5/4.

8. That, the petitioners were also allotted 2

vegetable shops in the NTPC Township. The

answering Respondent allotted one shop each to

Shri Rishi Ban and Shri Rajendra Ban on

28.03.2014. Copy of letter dated 28.03.2014

issued to them informing about the allotment of

vegetable shops is filed and marked as

ANNEXURE R-5/5.

9. That, as per the undertaking/submission made

before this Hon'ble Court, one medical shop was

to be allotted in the township. However, in order

to provide additional benefit, two medical shops

were actually allotted one medical shop on

28.03.2014 and another Jan Aushadhi Kendra on

31.01.2017. Copies of allotment letters of

Medicals shops dated 28.03.2014 and

31.01.2017 are filed and marked as ANNEXURE

R-5/6.

10. That, in relation to award of contract work to

the society of project-affected persons, the

answering Respondent, instead of granting a

single tender contract, has awarded three regular

contracts to the said society, in addition to many

other contracts awarded on a need basis. It is

pertinent to mention that contracts worth more

than Rs.50,07,38,419 have been awarded to the

petitioner and his family members between 2012-

2025. Copy of the details of such work awards is

filed and marked as ANNEXURE R-5/7.

11. That, in compliance of the rehabilitation

scheme, 7 residential plots measuring 14,000

square feet situated at Gopalpur have been

allotted to the petitioners through the Revenue

Department. Copies of the allotment of plots

letters issued to the petitioners are filed and

marked as ANNEXURE R-5/8.

12. That, the petitioners and their family members

have also been provided temporary

accommodation in the Gopalpur Community

Centre of NTPC till such time as they construct

their houses on the allotted plots.

13. That, in addition, the family of the petitioners

have been extended the following benefits;

a) Educational benefits in the form of

reimbursement of school fees for two

children (son or daughter) studying in

NTPC Township Schools.

b) Engagement of one adult family

member, Shri Rupendra Ban, as a contract

labourer through a contractor, working as

a loco pilot.

c) Compensation of Rs.6.88 lakhs

(Rs.1.72 lakhs 4) towards procurement of

ash bricks for construction of house.

d) Rs.3.65 lakhs paid towards

reimbursement of registry charges of new

land.

e) Rs.10 lakhs (Rs.2.5 lakhs 4) paid

towards resettlement package.

f) Three regular contracts awarded to

cooperative societies of the family instead

of one. The total value of contracts

awarded to the family between 2012-2025

exceeds Rs.500 lakhs. Out of this,

contracts valued at more than Rs.53.35

lakhs were for single-time works, and

contracts valued at about Rs.446 lakhs

were for regular works

14. That, the answering Respondent respectfully

submits that the petitioners have already been

paid substantial additional rehabilitation benefits

in monetary terms under various heads, including

Lump Sum Amount in place of Annuity,

Maintenance Grant, Self-Settlement Amount,

Compensation in lieu of 60,000 Fly Ash Bricks,

and Reimbursement of Land Registry Charges.

Copy of the relevant chart reflecting the aforesaid

payments is filed herewith and marked as

ANNEXURE R-5/9."

15. The petitioners have also executed an agreement on 25.03.2014 with

the respondent/NTPC, in which it was agreed that the petitioner will

not raise any further dispute with respect to rehabilitation benefits.

Para 6 of the agreement is as under:-

"6. यह कि प्रथम पक्ष द्वारा उपरोक्त मुआवजा एवं पुनर्स्थापन

राशि प्राप्त करने के पश्चांत पुनर्वास कार्य योजना के प्रावधानों के

अंतर्गत पुनर्स्थापन आदि संबंधित सभी दावों का पूर्ण एवं अंतिम

रुप से निपटारा माना जायेगा तथा प्रथम पक्ष इस संबंध में

भविष्य में अन्य कोई दावा इत्यादि करने का हकदार नहीं रहेगा

और न ही कोई दावा मान्य होगा । यदि कोई न्यायालय का

आदेश इस संबंध में प्राप्त होता है तो उसे नियमानुसार

अनुपालन किया जावेगा।"

16. From the additional facts submitted by the respondent/NTPC, the

following benefits have been extended to the petitioners under the

rehabilitation policy, which reflected from the document Annexure R-

5/4, i.e. -

10 vehicles of Kumar Ban and his family are hired by NTPC.

Current Total work value Remark. Current Sl.

                Name          Vehicle       Award         between 2012- Purchase order
      No.
                                             Value             2025            no.

       1 Vijaypal Ban         Bolero      3011648.00          8252917.75         4000367307

       2 Rajendra Ban         Bolero      3696176.00          3880229.95         4000287631


       3 Rupendra Ban         Bolero      3670737.00         16851017.45         4000285725





                                          Current       Total work value Remark. Current
      Sl.
                Name           Vehicle    Award          between 2012- Purchase order
      No.
                                           Value              2025            no.

            Gopalban, Son
       4                       Bolero    1240878.25         3256374.54      4000285721
            of Kumarban

            Gopiban, Son
       5                       Bolero    2219383.00         2096911.16      4000285858
            of Rishiban

            RISHI BAN                                                        Not applied
       6                       Bolero            0.00       1286995.00
            GOSWAMI                                                       during renewal

            Kumarban                                                         Not applied
       7                       Bolero            0.00       1975861.00
            Goswami                                                       during renewal

            RISHI BAN          Tractor
       8                                   1666210          9276540.94      4600082556
            GOSWAMI            Trolley

            Kumarban           Water
       9                                       907200       5103653.30      4000357893
            Goswami            Tanker

            Kumarban           Tractor
      10                                       899625       4864992.19      4000352676
            Goswami            Trolley

                            Total                        56,845,493.28

17. Further the shops are allotted to the petitioners under the same

rehabilitation policy, and the details of the allotted shops are as

under:-

"With reference to your application for allotment

of shop, we are pleased to inform you that you

have been allotted a shop on Licence, In our

Shopping Centre/Hospital premises. The details

of allotment are as under:

A) Shop No. 8, Indira Shopping Centre

B) Business for which shop is allotted:

Vegetable Shop

C) Period of Licence: From the date of

allotment to expiry of 11 (Eleven) months

period which may be extended for further

period of 11 months based on performance.

In connection with the above allotment, you are

requested to contact the undersigned for the

following:

1) Giving written advice for 11 months

Licence fee as Security Deposit, which

shall be deposited with the Finance

Department of NTPC Ltd., Korba.

2) Written advice for one year licence fee

for the shop to be taken by you.

3) Bring a stamp paper of value Rs.50/- to

execute the terms and conditions of

licence.

4) The allotment of shop is made subject to

the condition that the shop should be

started within a period of 15 days from the

date of issue of this letter, failing which, this

offer made to you will stand automatically

withdrawn and cancelled.

5) For allotted shop at a token rent & Elect.

Charges @ Rs.100/- (Rupees One hundred

only) per month will be charged from you

considering allotment of shop to

landoustees as a meanse of IGS for his

livelihood under R&R programme. Further

rent etc. may be revised by NTPC

Management as and when required."

18. The details of the contract awarded to the petitioners family is also

necessary to be mention here, which are as under:-

Contracts awarded (regular and one-time between 2012-2025)

Sl. Name Of President Name of Current Award Completed Total Remark No Society work Value work value Purchase up between order no. of 2012-2025 regular work 1 Bhu Visthapit Rishiban Maintenanc 2987609.38 22062090.04 23019659.42 4600082609 Kamgar e of the Sahkari Garden Samiti Maryadit Deployment 1666210 9276540.95 10942750.94 4600082556 Ghorapath- of Tractor Regd. No. Trolley 173 Other one 0.00 2702567.84 2702567.84 time single Contracts 2 Individual Kumar Ban 3000L 907200 5103653.30 4764617.19 4000357893 Goswami TRACTOR-

DRIVEN WTR TANKR, PART-3 CLEANING 899625 4864992.19 6010853.3 4000352676 & DISPOSAL OF ASH BPH TO DYK Other one- 0.00 295026.00 295026.00 time single Contracts

3 Individual Vijaypalban Other one- 0.00 2338359.50 2338359.50 time single Contracts Total 50,073,834.19

19. Further, the details of residential plots allotted to the petitioners are

as under:-

           S.No.                   Case No.                        Plot No.             Area              Date
            1.           R.C. No. 01/A-19/2013-2014                  410                2000           22.07.2014





                       2.           R.C. No. 01/A-19/2013-2014                                  411                   2000             22.07.2014
                       3.           R.C. No. 01/A-19/2013-2014                                  412                   2000             22.07.2014
                       4.           R.C. No. 01/A-19/2013-2014                                  413                   2000             22.07.2014
                       5.           R.C. No. 01/A-19/2013-2014                                  414                   2000             22.07.2014
                       6.           R.C. No. 01/A-19/2013-2014                                  415                   2000             22.07.2014
                       7.           R.C. No. 01/A-19/2013-2014                                  416                   2000             22.07.2014

20. The rehabilitation benefits provided by the NTPC to the petitioners

are also required to be reproduced here, which are as under:-

Rehabilitation benefits provided by NTPC to Shri Kumarban Goswami and family are as follows:

Sl. Name Lump Sum Maintenan Amount for Amount in Amount for Total Amount No. Amount in ce Grant Self- place of Land (₹) place of (₹) Settlement 60,000 Fly Registry (₹) Annuity (₹) (₹) Ash Bricks (₹)

1 Kumarban 19,89,000.00 85,400.00 2,50,000.00 1,72,200.00 1,14,998.00 26,11,598.00

2 Vijaypalban 20,55,000.00 85,400.00 2,50,000.00 1,72,200.00 93,546.00 26,56,146.00

3 Rishiban 24,54,000.00 85,400.00 2,50,000.00 1,72,200.00 55,553.00 30,17,153.00

4 Rajendraban 19,89,000.00 85,400.00 2,50,000.00 1,72,200.00 62,945.00 25,59,545.00

5 Rupendraban 2,50,000.00 85,400.00 0.00 0.00 38,073.00 3,73,473.00

21. The details of land holding, compensation and rehabilitation benefits

extended to the petitioners are as under:-

NTPC LIMITED KORBA DETAILS OF LAND HOLDING + COMPENSATION + R&R BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF SHRI KUMAR BAN & FAMILY

S.N Name Area in acre R&R Grant in Subsistence Resettlement Cost of Ash Total R&R Date Stamp Duty Date Grand Total lieu of Allowance Amount Brick 60,000 Grant other for Land (Rs.p.) Annuity 700 days Rs.2.50 lakh bricks @ than Stamp Purchase (Rs.p.) Rs.122.00 each per Rs.2.27 per duty benefits (Rs.p.) per day Homeoustee brick (Rs.p.) (Rs.p.) (Rs.p.) Family (Rs.p.)

1 Kumar Ban 6.63 1,989,000.00 85,400.00 250,000.00 172,200.00 2,496,600.00 25.03.2014 114,998.00 27.05.2014 2,611,598.00

2 Vijay Pal Ban 6.85 2,055,000.00 85,400.00 250,000.00 172,200.00 2,562,600.00 25.03.2014 93,546.00 27.05.2014 2,656,146.00

3 Rajendra Ban 6.63 1,989,000.00 85,400.00 250,000.00 172,200.00 2,496,600.00 25.03.2014 62,945.00 27.05.2014 2,559,545.00

4 Rishi Ban 8.18 2,454,000.00 85,400.00 250,000.00 172,200.00 2,961,600.00 25.03.2014 55,553.00 27.05.2014 3,017,153.00

5 Rupendra Ban 0.37 250,000.00 85,400.00 0.00 0.00 335,400.00 25.03.2014 38,073.00 23.09.2014 373,473.00

6 Savitri Devi 1 300,000.00 85,400.00 250,000.00 172,200.00 807,600.00 08.04.2014 56,618.00 23.09.2014 864,218.00

7 Gopal Ban Homeoustee 0 85,400.00 250,000.00 172,200.00 507,600.00 25.03.2014 0.00 507,600.00

Grand Total 29.66 9,037,000.00 597,800.00 1,500,000.00 1,033,200.00 12,168,000.00 12,589,733.00

22. The petitioners have admittedly accepted substantial rehabilitation

benefits, including monetary compensation, allotment of shops,

residential plots, award of contracts and other facilities. Having

accepted the alternative package in lieu of employment, they are

estopped from claiming employment as an additional benefit. The

doctrine that a party cannot approbate and reprobate is well settled.

In R.N. Gosain v. Yashpal Dhir, (1992) 4 SCC 683, the Supreme

Court held that a party cannot accept and reject the same instrument

or transaction. The petitioners, having enjoyed the benefits flowing

from the rehabilitation package for more than a decade, cannot now

resile and seek further relief.

23. The principle of res judicata applies not only to civil suits but also to

writ proceedings. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Daryao and Others

v. State of U.P., AIR 1961 SC 1457, held that the general principle of

res judicata applies to writ petitions under Article 226 of the

Constitution. Similarly, in Forward Construction Co. v. Prabhat

Mandal (Regd.), Andheri, (1986) 1 SCC 100, the Supreme Court

held that the principle of constructive res judicata is applicable even

in writ jurisdiction to prevent re-agitation of issues which were or

could have been raised earlier.

24. In the present case, the issue of employment under the CG R&R

Policy was directly and substantially in issue in the earlier writ petition

and stood adjudicated. The direction issued by coordinate bench of

this Court was conditional employment, which was to be considered

and, if unavailable, alternative rehabilitation package was to be

provided. The said direction has been complied with. The petitioners

cannot now reopen the matter and seek a fresh adjudication on the

same cause of action.

25. Furthermore, the CG R&R Policy does not confer an absolute right to

employment. It contemplates consideration for employment, subject

to availability of posts, failing which alternative benefits may be

granted. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Naresh

Kumar Bali, (1994) 4 SCC 448, has held that no mandamus can be

issued directing the State or its instrumentalities to create posts or

provide employment dehors the statutory framework.

26. In view of the foregoing analysis, this Court is of the considered

opinion that, (i) The issue of employment already stands adjudicated

in earlier proceedings; (ii) The directions issued by this Court in W.P.

(C) No. 692 of 2012 have been complied with; (iii) The petitioners

have accepted the alternative rehabilitation package; and (iv) No

enforceable legal right survives warranting interference under Article

226 of the Constitution of India.

27. Accordingly, the writ petition, being devoid of merit and deserves to

be and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.

Sd/-

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved