Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rakesh Birla vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 May, 2024
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 1 st OF MAY, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 22264 of 2021
BETWEEN:-
1. RAMSHANKAR S/O KANHAIYALAL, AGED ABOUT
34 YEARS, GANESH NAGR OMKARESHWAR
TEHSIL PUNASA DISTT. KHANDWA M.P. (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. RAJENDRA S/O VIKRAM SINGH, AGED ABOUT 39
YEARS, URJA VIHAR COLONY SIDHHAWARKOOT
TEH. PUNASA (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. DHARMENDRA S/O GOVIND SINGH, AGED ABOUT
42 YEARS, BALWADI OMKARESHWAR TEH.
PUNASA (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SHAITAN S/O BOKHAR SINGH, AGED ABOUT 44
YEARS, BALWADI OMKARESHWAR TEH. PUNASA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SHANTILAL S/O TULSIRAM YADAV, AGED ABOUT
34 YEARS, VILLAGE SARLYA TEH. PUNASA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
6. MADHUSUDAN S/O RAM SWAROOP, AGED ABOUT
38 YEARS, WARD NO. 15 OMKARESHWAR TEH.
PUNASA (MADHYA PRADESH)
7. ASHOK S/O KAMAL SINGH ANJANE, AGED ABOUT
34 YEARS, VILLAGE INPUN TEH. PUNASA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
8. DEVENDRA S/O SARDAR SINGH, AGED ABOUT 40
Y E A R S , I/3/8 URJA VIHAR COLONY
SIDHHAWARKOOT TEH. PUNASA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
9. BHIMSINGH S/O SURAT SINGH BAIS, AGED
ABOUT 36 YEARS, VAISHNAV COLONY SANAWAD
(MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
2
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI SHEKHAR SHARMA AND SHRI SHREYAS PANDIT - ADVOCATES)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR.
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY NARMADA VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VALLABH
BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. NARMADA HYDRO DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION LIMITED THR. MANAGING
DIRECTOR PARISAR NEAR HOTEL ASHOKA LAKE
VIEW SHYAMALA HILLS (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. DEPUTY MAGAGER (HR) NARMADA HYDRO
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PARISAR NEAR
HOTEL ASHOKA LAKE VIEW SHYAMALA HILLS
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(NHDC BY SHRI DEEPAK AWASTHY AND SHRI AMAL PUSHP SHORTI -
ADVOCATES)
WRIT PETITION No. 22292 of 2021
BETWEEN:-
1. RAKESH BIRLA S/O PREMLAL BIRLA, AGED
ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE INPUN
TEHSIL PUNASA KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. JAGDISH INGLA S/O GHUSAI INGLA, AGED ABOUT
43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE VILLAGE
IMPURN, TEHSIL PUNASA DISTRICT KHANDWA
M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. PRADEEP CHAKRAVEDI S/O RADHESHYAM
CHAKRAVEDI, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: SERVICE WARD NO. 7 VILLAGE
GOP SAILANI, TEHSIL PUNASA DISTRICT
KHANDWA M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. KIRESINGH S/O LAKHANLAL SOLANKI, AGED
ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE INPUN
TEHSIL PUNASA KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. MAHENDRA S/O LAKHME SINGH, AGED ABOUT
35 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE GOL SAILANI,
TEHSIL PUNASA (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
3
6. DARIYAV S/O BANSHILAL CHOUHAN, AGED
ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE
INDRAVADI, TEHSIL PUNASA, DISTRICT
KHANDWA M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
7. RAJARAM S/O NAHARMAL AWASHYA, AGED
ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE INPUN,
TEHSIL PUNASA DISTRICT KHANDWA M.P.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
8. RAJESH S/O RAMU, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: SERVICE HOUSE NO. 76, WARD NO.
3, OMKARESHWAR, TEHSIL PUNASA DISTRICT
KHANDWA M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
9. SHIVDAS S/O NANAJI PATEL, AGED ABOUT 46
YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE VILLAGE INPUN,
TEHSIL PUNASA DISTRICT KHNADWA M.P.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
10. SURAJ S/O BHAVARSINGH CHOUHAN, AGED
ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE
DASHAHARA MAIDAN, BADWAH DISTRICT
KHARGONE M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
11. ATMARAM S/O DEVRAM GOYAL, AGED ABOUT 40
YEAR S, OCCUPATION: SERVICE INPUN TEHSIL
PUNASA DISTRICT KHANDWA M.P. (MADHYA
PRADESH)
12. SUKHDEV S/O BHAIRAMJI PATEL, AGED ABOUT
47 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE VILLAGE
INPUN, TEHSIL PUNASA DISTRICT KHNADWA
M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI SHEKHAR SHARMA AND SHRI SHREYAS PANDIT - ADVOCATES)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY NARMADA VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VALLABH
BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. NARMADA HYDRO DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION LIMITED THROUGH ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR N.H. D.C. PARISAR, NEAR
HOTEL ASHOKA LAKE VIEW, SHYAMLA HILLS
(MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
4
3. DEPUTY MANAGER (HR) NARMADA HYDRO
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION NHDC PARISAR,
NEAR HOTEL ASHOKA LAKE VIEW, SHYAMALA
HILLS, BHOPAL M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(NHDC BY SHRI DEEPAK AWASTHY AND SHRI AMAL PUSHP SHORTI -
ADVOCATES)
WRIT PETITION No. 22298 of 2021
BETWEEN:-
1. JITENDRA S/O BABUSINGH, AGED ABOUT 41
Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: SERVICE BALWADI
OMKARESHWAR TEHSIL PUNASA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. VIRENDRA S/O SHYAM SINGH, AGED ABOUT 44
YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE I 1/3 URJA VIHAR
COLONY SIDHHAWARKOOT TEH. PUNASA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. GAMBHIR S/O BALWANT SINGH, AGED ABOUT 44
Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: SERVICE SHARMA
COLONY BADWAH (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. RAVINDRA S/O JAGDISH SHARMA, AGED ABOUT
44 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE VILLAGE
INPUN TEH. PUNASA (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. AJAY S/O KASHIRAM, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: SERVICE BALWADI
OMKARESHWAR TEH. PUNASA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI SHEKHAR SHARMA AND SHRI SHREYAS PANDIT - ADVOCATES)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY NARMADA VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VALLABH
BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. NARMADA HYDRO DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION LIMITED THR. MANAGING
D I R E C T O R NHDC PARISAR NEAR HOTEL
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
5
ASHOKA LAKE VIEW SHYAMALS (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. DEPUTY MANAGER (HR) NARMADA HYDRO
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION NHDC PARISAR
NEAR HOTEL ASHOKA LAKE VIEW SHYAMALS
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(NHDC BY SHRI DEEPAK AWASTHY AND SHRI AMAL PUSHP SHORTI -
ADVOCATES)
WRIT PETITION No. 22433 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1. MAHESH HIRVE S/O SHRI PRABHURAM HIRVE,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PUMP
OPERATOR EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR
POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA
(M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. DINESH JADAM S/O SHRI DASHRATH SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
ELECTRICIAN EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR
POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA
(M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. TILOK SHUKLA S/O SHRI GENADALAL SHUKLA,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION: FITTER
EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION,
(NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. MAHENDRA MAURYA S/O LATE SHRI BAKHTWAR
SINGH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
FITTER EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER
STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. DEEPAK KHALE S/O SHRI NANDKISHORE KHALE,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: S.B.T.
EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION,
(NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
6. BASANT HIRE S/O NARAN HIRE, AGED ABOUT 45
Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: PUMP OPERATOR
EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION,
(NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA
Signature Not Verified
PRADESH)
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
6
7. SANJAY SAVNER S/O SHRI AOOP SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCCUPATION: S.B.T. EMPLOYEE
OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION, (NHDC),
NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
8. SHAILENDRA CHANDRAYAN S/O KANHAIYALAL,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCCUPATION: S.B.T.
EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION,
(NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
9. DHARMENDRA PATEL S/O VIJAY SINGH PATEL,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION: S.B.T .
EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION,
(NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
10. RAMNARAYAN MANDRAI S/O RANGLAL
MANDRAI, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
S.B.T . EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER
STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
11. KAMLESH SAAD S/O RAMGOPAL SAAD, AGED
ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: ELECTRICIAN
EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION,
(NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
12. PUNAM MEENA S/O SHRI MANSHARAM MEENA,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: S.B.T.
EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION,
(NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
13. MUKESH YADUWANSHI S/O DARIYAV SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
ELECTRICIAN EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR
POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA
(M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
14. AJAY SOLANKI S/O SHRI KOMAL SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION: ELECTRICIAN
EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION,
(NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
15. DHARMENDRA MALVIYA S/O SHRI BHADANLAL
AHIRAVAR, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: S.B.T. ELECTRICIAN EMPLOYEE OF
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
7
INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR
KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
16. UTTAM SINGH DEVDA S/O LATE SHRI
RAGHUNATH SINGH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: ELECTRICIAN EMPLOYEE OF
INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR
KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
17. JASWANT SINGH YADAV S/O SHRI NATTHU
SINGH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
OPERATOR EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR
POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA
(M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
18. BHAGWAN SINGH PARMAR S/O BAPU SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION: FITTER
EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION,
(NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
19. ASHOK SINGH PARMAR S/O BAPU SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCCUPATION: ELECTRICIAN
EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION,
(NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
20. MAHENDRA SINGH CHOUHAN S/O SHRI BHARAT
SINGH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
ELECTRICIAN EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR
POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA
(M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
21. BUDDHU RAM MALVIYA S/O BABULAL MALVIYA,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
COMPRESSOR OPERATOR EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA
SAGAR POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR
KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
22. MAHENDRA SINGH TOMAR S/O GAJRAJ SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
ELECTRICIAN EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR
POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA
(M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
23. RAGHVENDRA SINGH THAKUR S/O LATE SHRI
MOHAN SINGH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: OPERATOR EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA
SAGAR POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR
KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
8
24. JITENDRA SINGH TOMAR S/O SHRI PRADUYMN
SINGH TOMAR, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: ELECTRICIAN EMPLOYEE OF
INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR
KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
25. BANNE SINGH MAURYA S/O SHRI VIKRAM SINGH
MAURYA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
FITTER EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER
STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
26. NANDU SINGH PAWAR S/O SHRI GANGARAM
PAWAR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
SKILLED FITTER EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR
POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA
(M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
27. SHIVPAL SINGH SOLANKI S/O SINGH
CHHATARPAL SINGH SOLANKI, AGED ABOUT 45
YEAR S , OCCUPATION: FITTER EMPLOYEE OF
INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR
KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
28. VIJAY MEENA S/O SHRI RAMADHAR MEENA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: FITTER
EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION,
(NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.) (MADHYA
PRADESH)
29. RAJESH PARIHAR S/O SHRI RADHESHYAM
PARIHAR, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER EMPLOYEE OF INDIRA SAGAR POWER
STATION, (NHDC), NAGAR KHANDWA (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
30. SMT. PUSHPA MEENA W/O LATE SHRI BANSILAL
MEENA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HOUSE WIFE R/O H. NO. A/410 SECTOR NO.6 NAYA
HARSOOD DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI SHEKHAR SHARMA AND SHRI SHREYAS PANDIT - ADVOCATES)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY NARMADA VALLEY
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VALLABH
BHAWAN BHOPAL (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
9
2. MANAGING DIRECTOR NARMADA HYDRO
ELECTOR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.
NHDC COMPLEX SHYAMLA HILLS BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. SENIOR GENERAL MANAGER KHANDWA NHDC
OFFICE NARBADA NAGAR KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. PRESIDING OFFICER (MONITORING) OFFICE OF
MANAGING DIRECTOR (R AND R) NARBADA
HYDRO ELECTIRC CORPORATION KHANDWA
DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. VIJENDRA SINGH CHOUHAN S/O SHRI VIKRAM
SINGH CHOUHAN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-315, NHDC COLONY,
NARMADA NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
6. HUKUM SINGH S/O SHRI BALDEV, AGED ABOUT
57 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-423,
NHDC COLONY, NARMADA NAGAR, DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
7. JAWAHAR BABU SUNAR S/O LATE SHRI
RAMGOPAL SONI, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-384, NHDC COLONY,
NARMADA NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
8. RANJEET SINGH MOURYA S/O VIKRAM SINGH
MOURYA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H-374, NHDC COLONY, NARMADA
NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
9. MUKESH KUMAR S/O LATE BABULAL KAROLE,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O H-358, NHDC COLONY, NARMADA NAGAR,
DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
10. BALAKRAM SAWNER S/O SHRI PANCHAMLAL
SAWNER, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H-418, NHDC COLONY, NARMADA
NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
11. DILIP KUMAR PATEL S/O LATE SHRI HIMMAT
PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O0 H-334, NHDC COLONY, NARMADA
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
10
NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
12. P.V. VARGHESE S/O LATE SHRI P.A. VARGHESE,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O H.NO.362, NHDC COLONY, INDIRA SAGAR
POWER STATION, NARMADA NAGAR DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
13. SOHANLAL PAWAR S/O LATE SHRI SHARVAN
PAWAR, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H 451, NHDC COLONY, NARMADA
NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
14. JITENDRA KUMAR MALAKAR S/O SHRI
BHAGWAN DAS MALAKAR, AGED ABOUT 48
YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-450, NHDC
COLONY, NARMADA NAGAR, DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
15. DURGA PRASAD S/O LATE SHRI SHIVA PRASAD,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O H.NO.291, NHDC COLONY, NARMADA NAGAR,
DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
16. RAJENDRA KUMAR S/O LATE SHRI SHIVA
PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H.NO.431, NHDC COLONY, NARMADA
NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
17. DINESH SINGH S/O SHRI GULAB SINGH
CHOUHAN, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-372, NHDC COLONY,
NARMADA NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
18. RANJEET KUMAR TAYWADE S/O SHRI RAMRAO
TAYWADE, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H-394, NHDC COLONY, NARMADA
NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
19. KAMLESH KUMAR MASATKAR S/O SHRI
BHAGWAT RAO MASATKAR, AGED ABOUT 46
YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-436, NHDC
COLONY, NARMADA NAGAR, DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
20. KAMLESH KUMAR MASATKAR S/O SHRI
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
11
BHAGWAT RAO MASATKAR, AGED ABOUT 46
YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-436, NHDC
COLONY, NARMADA NAGAR, DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
21. ANTIM KUMAR KHEDEKAR S/O LATE SHRI
HARERAM KHEDKAR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-400, NHDC COLONY,
NARMADA NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
22. PREMLAL GURJAR S/O SHRI HIRALAL GURJAR,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O H-447, NHDC COLONY, NARMADA NAGAR,
DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
23. RAJNESH KUMAR S/O SHRI SEWA RAM, AGED
ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-
3 7 8 , NHDC COLONY, NARMADA NAGAR,
DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
24. MAHESH KUMAR MALAKAR S/O SHRI HIRALAL
MALAKAR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-366, NHDC COLONY,
NARMADA NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
25. SURESH KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA S/O
RAMCHANDRALAL SHRIVASTAVA, AGED ABOUT
45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-366,
NHDC COLONY, NARMADA NAGAR, DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
26. BHAGWAN SINGH S/O RAJENDRA SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-
3 8 0 , NHDC COLONY, NARMADA NAGAR,
DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
27. KAILASH SINGH PETHARE S/O LATE SHRI
NATTHU SINGH PETHARE, AGED ABOUT 45
YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-412, NHDC
COLONY, NARMADA NAGAR, DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
28. DURGARAM PATEL S/O SHREE DEVRAM PATEL,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O H-410, NHDC COLONY, NARMADA NAGAR,
DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
29. VINAY KUMAR BAJPAI S/O LATE SHRI SHIV
SHANKAR BAJPAI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-350, NHDC COLONY,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
12
NARMADA NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
30. MANOJ PACHOLI S/O LATE SHRI RADHESHYAM
PACHOLI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H.356, NHDC COLONY, NARMADA
NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
31. SURESH KUMAR KEWAT S/O SHRI MITTHULAL
KEWAT, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H-413, NHDC COLONY, NARMADA
NAGAR, DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
32. BRIJKISHORE CHHAPRE S/O SHRI RAMESH
CHHAPRE, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H-377 NHDC COLONY NARMADA
NAGAR DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
33. SANTOSH KUMAR S/O SHRI PANCHAM SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O H-408 NHDC COLONY NERMADA NAGAR
DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
34. MANOJ SINGH S/O HEERA SINGH, AGED ABOUT
45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-441 NHDC
COLONY NARMADA NAGAR DISTRICT (MADHYA
PRADESH)
35. MANOHAR YADAV S/O HUKUM SINGH YADAV,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O NHDC COLONY NARMADA NAGAR DISTRICT
(MADHYA PRADESH)
36. MANOHAR YADAV S/O HUKUM SINGH YADAV,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O NHDC COLONY NARMADA NAGR DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
37. DEVENDAR KUMAR CHOUDHARY S/O SHRI M.L.
CHOUDHARY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-439 NHDC COLONY
NRMADA NAGAR DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
38. RAJESH PARDHE S/O SHRI GHUDAN RAO
PARDHE, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H-382 NHDC COLONY NARMADA
NAGAR DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
39. RAJKUMAR GOHAR S/O LATE SHRI KALURAM
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
13
GOHAR, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H-443 NHDC COLONY NARMADA
NAGAR DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
40. AHMED KHAN S/O ABDUL KHAN, AGED ABOUT 43
YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-416 NHDC
COLONY NARMADA NAGAR DISTRICT (MADHYA
PRADESH)
41. RISHIKESH LAL S/O SHRI JAWAHAR RAM, AGED
ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-36
NHDC COLONY NARMADA NAGAR DISTRICT
(MADHYA PRADESH)
42. GOVIND MANIK S/O SHRI RAMADHAR MANIK,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O H-438 NHDC COLONY NARMADA NAGAR
DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
43. SACHIN JAISWAL S/O LATE SHRI ISHWAR DAS
JAISWAL, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O JAISWAL COLONY NEAR NAG DEVTA
TEMPLE POST TEHSIL PUNASA DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
44. PRABHU VERMA S/O SHRI FAATU VERMA, AGED
ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-
383 NHDC COLONY NARMADA NAGAR DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
45. RAJU CHAWDA S/O SHRI SUKHLAL CHAWDA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O H-369 NHDC COLONY NARMADA NAGAR
DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
46. BALAM SINGH S/O SHRI HAYAT SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-
373 NHDC COLONY NARMADA NAGAR DISTRICT
(MADHYA PRADESH)
47. BHARAT SINGH CHOUHAN S/O SHRI MOHAN
SINGH CHOUHAN, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-426 NHDC COLONY
NARMADA NAGAR DITRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
48. CHANDRAPAL YADAV S/O SHRI MADHUSUDAN
YADAV OCCUPATION: HELPER H-328 NHDC
COLONY NARMADA NAGAR DISTRICT (MADHYA
PRADESH)
49. NARENDRA JATAV S/O SHRI RAMCHARAN
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
14
JATAV, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H 391 NHDC COLONY NARMADA
NAGAR DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
50. MANOJ KUMAR KOL S/O SHRI SHARDA PRASAD,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O H-419 NHDC COLONY NARMDA NAGAR
DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
51. SANTOSH INGLE S/O SHRI PRAKASH INGLE,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O H-310 NHDC COLONY NARMADA NAGAR
DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
52. SURESH PATEL S/O SHRI SHRIRAM PATEL, AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER H-395
NHDC COLONY NARMADA NAGAR DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
53. MAHADEV SINGH PAWAR S/O SHRI BHAGWAN
SINGH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H--337 NHDC COLONY NARMADA
NAGAR DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
54. RAJENDRA SINGH S/O SHRI SHANKAR SINGH
DODIYA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H-369 NHDC COLONY NARMADA
NAGAR DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
55. SUNIL SURADKAR S/O LATE RAMDAS
SURADKAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-347 NHDC COLONY
NARMADA NAGAR DISTRICT (MADHYA
PRADESH)
56. HIRALAL JAISWAL S/O LATE SHRI MOHANLAL
JAISWAL, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER R/O H-448 NHDC COLONY NARMADA
NAGAR DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
57. BAK SINGH BHASKAR S/O LATE SHRI FAJIT
SINGH BHASKAR, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-428 NHDC COLONY
NARMAD NAGAR DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
58. JAGDISH KUMAR PRAJAPATI S/O SHRI DALCHAN
PRAJAPATI, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O H-289 NHDC COLONY
NARMADA NAGAR DISTRICT (MADHYA
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
15
PRADESH)
59. JHUMAKLAL GUJAR S/O SHRI GAJRAJ SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O H-399 NHDC COLONY NARMADA NAGR
DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
60. RAJU BHALERAO S/O SHRI OMKAR BHALERAO,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
R/O H-364 NHDC COLONY NARMADA NAGAR
DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
61. SATISH KUMAR S/O LATE SHRI SOMPAL SINGH
OCCUPATION: HELPER R/O OMKARESHWAR
POWER STATION SIDDWARKUT NHDC LTD.
DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
62. DEEPAK BHALREY S/O SHRI RAMESH CHAND,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
OMKARESHWAR POWER STATION
SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
63. RADHESHYAM VERMA S/O LATE SHRI GHUSAI,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
OMKARESHWAR POWER STATION
SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
64. RAJESH KUMAR S/O LATE SHRI KANCHHI SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
OMKARESHWAR POWER STATION
SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
65. RAKESH KUMAR GADHEWAL S/O PREMCHAND,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
OMKARESHWAR POWER STATION
SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
66. MAKHAN LAL MASCOLE S/O SHRI CHHUTTAN
LAL MASCOLE, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER OMKARESHWAR POWER
STATION SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
67. VISHWASH KUMAR SALVE S/O SHRI UTTAM
SALVE, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER OMKARESHWAR POWER STATION
SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
16
68. UTTAM SINGH S/O BHAGWAT SINGH CHOUHAN,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
OMKARESHWAR POWER STATION
SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
69. BADRI PRASAD PANCHAL S/O LATE SHRI
NATHULAL PANCHAL, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER OMKARESHWAR POWER
STATION SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
70. SEKADU KANESH S/O SHRI MEHATAB SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
OMKARESHWAR POWER STATION
SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
71. MAHESH RAWAL S/O PHOOLCHAND RAWAL,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
OMKARESHWAR POWER STATION
SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
72. BRAJESH KUMAR KHADAYTE S/O LATE SHRI
JAGANNATH KHADAYTE, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER OMKARESHWAR POWER
STATION SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
73. RAVINDRA KUMAR KANADE S/O SHRI BHAIRAM
KANADE, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HELPER OMKARESHWAR POWER STATION
SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
74. DHANNALAL WANKHEDE S/O SHRI BHAIRAM
WANKHEDE, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HELPER OMKARESHWAR POWER
STATION SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT
KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
75. RAGHUVEER SINGH S/O SHRI VIKRAM SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HELPER
OMKARESHWAR POWER STATION
SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
76. KULDEEP AMBORE S/O LATE SHRI DEVRAV
AMBORE, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AMIT JAIN
Signing time: 02-05-
2024 16:30:08
17
HELPER OMKARESHWAR POWER STATION
SIDDHWARKUT NHDC LTD. DISTRICT KHANDWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
77. MOHAN SINGH GHATE S/O LATE SHRI
SHOBHARAM GHATE, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, H-
397 INDIRA SAGAR POWER STATION (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(NHDC BY SHRI DEEPAK AWASTHY AND SHRI AMAL PUSHP SHORTI -
ADVOCATES)
(INTERVENOR BY SHRI R.N.SINGH (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)
ASSISTED BY SHRI AKSHAY PAWAR - ADVOCATE (PRESENT IN PERSON)
These petitions coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
These petitions are filed claiming similar relief, therefore,
W.P.No.22433/2022 is taken as a lead case.
Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners are challenging the order
Annexure P/8, which is a notice issued by the Narmada Hydroelectric
Development Corporation Limited (NHDCL) on 24.9.2022 in the form of a
circular to fill up the post of Electrician Grade-III (W-4)/Fitter Grade-III (W-4)
through internal recruitment by holding a written/trade examination as well as the
advertisement dated 18.8.2021.
Petitioners are admittedly land oustees and their land was acquired for
construction of Hydroelectric Project on River Narmada. As per the
rehabilitation policy amended upto November, 2002 contained in Annexure P/3,
the petitioners were to be given preferential treatment in the matter of
recruitment but they have been discriminated and are working as
contractual/outsourced employees since 2004. The respondents are not only
required to give preferential treatment to the petitioners but the policy will
override the recruitment rules.
Shri Shekhar Sharma and Shri Shreyas Pandit, learned counsel for the
petitioners submit that the provisions as contained in Article 166 of the
Constitution of India are exhaustive and the rehabilitation policy Annexure P/3
framed as executive instructions will override the recruitment rules. Article 21 of
the Constitution deals with the facet of right to life and once the land oustees
were deprived of their valuable assets, it is their right to have preferential
treatment in the matter of employment and instead of issuing an advertisement
for open recruitment, which would have made the petitioners entitled to apply
and compete for appointment, a restricted notice has been issued as contained
in Annexure P/8.
Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Apex Court in N.D.Jayal &
Another versus Union of India & Another (2004) 9 SCC 362 wherein
reading Paragraph No.60, Shri Shreyas Pandit submits that rehabilitation is not
only about providing just food, clothes or shelter. It is also about extending
support to rebuild livelihood by ensuring necessary amenities of life.
Rehabilitation of the oustees is a logical corollary of Article 21. The oustees
should be in a better position to lead a decent life and earn livelihood in the
rehabilitated locations. Thus, observed this Court in Narmada Bachao
Andolan's case (supra). The overarching projected benefits from the dam
should not be counted as an alibi to deprive the fundamental rights of oustees.
They should be rehabilitated as soon as they are uprooted. And none of them
should be allowed to wait for rehabilitation. Rehabilitation should take place
before six months of submergence. Such a time limit was fixed by this Court in
B D Sharma v. Union of India, [1992] Supp 3 SCC 93 and this was
reiterated in Narmada. This prior rehabilitation will create a sense of confidence
among the oustees and they will be in better position to start their life by
acclimatizing themselves with the new environment.
Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance
on the judgment of the Apex Court in State of Madhya Pradesh versus
Narmada Bachao Andolan & Another (2011) 7 SCC 639 and reading from
Paragraph Nos.26 & 27, he points out that the Apex Court has noted in regard
to applicability of Article 21 of the Constitution of India in the matter of land
acquisition and rehabilitation in the following terms:-
''26. It is desirable for the authority concerned to ensure that
as far as practicable persons who had been living and carrying on
business or other activity on the land acquired, if they so desire, and
are willing to purchase and comply with any requirement of the
authority or the local body, be given a piece of land on terms settled
with due regard to the price at which land has been acquired from
them. However, the State Government cannot be compelled to
provide alternate accommodation to the oustees and it is for the
authority concerned to consider the desirability and feasibility of
providing alternative land considering the facts and circumstances of
each case.
27.In certain cases, the oustees are entitled to rehabilitation.
Rehabilitation is meant only for those persons who have been
rendered destitute because of a loss of residence or livelihood as a
consequence of land acquisition. The authorities must explore the
avenues of rehabilitation by way of employment, housing, investment
opportunities, and identification of alternative lands.
"10. A blinkered vision of development, complete apathy towards
those who are highly adversely affected by the development process
and a cynical unconcern for the enforcement of the laws lead to a
situation where the rights and benefits promised and guaranteed
under the Constitution hardly ever reach the most marginalised
citizens." (Mahanadi Coalfields Limited Case (2010) 11 SCC 269
P.273 Para 10)
For people whose lives and livelihoods are intrinsically
connected to the land, the economic and cultural shift to a market
economy can be traumatic.(Vide State of U.P. v Pista Devi, Narpat
Singh v Jaipur Development Authority, Land Acquisition Officer v
Mahabood, Mahanadi Coalfields Limited v. Mathias Oram and Brij
Mohan v HUDA). The fundamental right of the framer to cultivation
is a part of right to livelihood. "Agricultural land is the foundation for
a sense of security and freedom from fear. Assured possession is a
lasting source for peace and prosperity". India being a predominantly
agricultural society, there is a "strong linkage between the land and
the person's status in (the) social system".
Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Apex Court in Narmada
Bachao versus State of Madhya Pradesh (2011) 12 SCC 333 and referring
to Paragraph Nos.20 to 30, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners
that R&R policy will have predominance over any of the other rules and should
be given a preferential treatment. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the
Apex Court in Union of India (UOI) & Others versus Shankar Prasad
Deep & Others MANU/SC/0446/2019 and reading Paragraph No.19, it is
submitted that there could not have been any internal recruitment without
affording opportunity of employment to the petitioners.
Shri R.N.Singh, learned Senior Counsel (through Video Conferencing)
assisted by Akshay Pawar, learned counsel (Present In Person) for the
intervenor in one of the cases i.e. Writ Petition 22433/2022 submits that reading
the relief clause, it is evident that the writ petitions have become infructuous
with passage of time. The intervenors are the persons, who are entitled to be
given employment by virtue of internal recruitment and because of operation of
stay given by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, they are the sufferers.
Shri Deepak Awasthy, Advocate and Shri Amal Pushp Shroti, Advocate
appearing for the NHDC submit that the petitioners have no claim to have a
preferential treatment. Clause 14 of the R&R policy as contained in Annexure
P/3 categorically provides that preference will be given in the matter of
employment to the members of the displaced persons during the construction
of the project. They submit that firstly construction of the Project is over and
secondly, since the recruitment rules provide for more than one source of
recruitment, the employer's hand cannot be tied to adopt a particular form of
mode of recruitment giving preference to any other mode of recruitment. The
employer can always choose as to which mode of recruitment is more beneficial
to serve the interest of its entity and, therefore, there being a statutory provision
in the form of rule, that rule being not challenged by the petitioners, cannot be
interfered by the High Court.
Shri Shekhar Sharma points out that Clause 11.1(a) of the R&R Policy,
2002, which deals with the employment provides that for the displaced persons,
the employment offices and sub offices shall be opened and in the matter of
project while giving employment, the persons affected due to submergence will
be given preference and, therefore, the aforesaid preference should be read in
terms of Article 166 read with Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.
Paragraph No.26 of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in State of
Madhya Pradesh versus Narmada Bachao Andolan & Another (supra)
deals with the aspect of desirability for the authority concerned to ensure that as
far as practicable persons who had been living and carrying on business or
other activity on the land acquired, if they so desire, and are willing to purchase
and comply with any requirement of the authority or the local body, be given a
piece of land on terms settled with due regard to the price at which land has
been acquired from them. However, the State Government cannot be compelled
to provide alternate accommodation to the oustees and it is for the authority
concerned to consider the desirability and feasibility of providing alternative
land considering the facts and circumstances of each case.
Paragraph No.27 of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in State of
Madhya Pradesh versus Narmada Bachao Andolan & Another (supra)
speaks that rehabilitation is meant only for those persons, who have been
rendered destitute because of a loss of residence or livelihood as a
consequence of land acquisition. The authorities must explore the avenues of
rehabilitation by way of employment, housing, investment opportunities, and
identification of alternative lands. Thereafter in Paragraph No.28, referring to the
judgment of the Apex Court in Chameli Singh & Others v. State of U.P. &
Anr., (1996) 2 SCC 549:AIR 1996 SC 1051 and Samatha v. State of A.P.
& Others (1997) 8 SCC 191:AIR 1997 SC 3297, it is held that the plea of
deprivation of right to livelihood under Article 21 is unsustainable. It is also held
that this Court has consistently held that Article 300-A is not only a constitution
right but also a human right.
It is also held referring to Paragraph Nos.30 & 58 in Jilubhai Nanbhai
Khachar versus State of Gujarat AIR 1995 SC 142;1995 Supp (1) SCC
596 that the principle of unfairness of procedure attracting Article 21 of the
Constitution of India does not apply to the acquisition or deprivation of
property under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India giving effect to the
directive principles. The Apex Court in Paragraph No.34 has dealt with the
relevant part of the R&R policy for the purpose of determination of the issues
and held that the aim of the State Government is that all displaced families as
defined hereinafter would after their relocation and resettlement improve, or
atleast regain, their previous standard of living within a reasonable time.
Thus, it is evident that as far as employment is concerned, that is already
available through the Contractor, the petitioners are not left to fend for
themselves and it is not their case that they have no employment after their land
being taken over and they being the land oustees.
Now the issue is that whether the petitioners can claim as a matter of right
and say that the authority should adopt a particular mode of recruitment in
preference to another mode of recruitment or that is to be left best to the
discretion of the authorities.
The respondents have filed copy of recruitment rules approved by the
Board of Directors as Annexure R/2/5. Rule 4.b provides for direct recruitment
from outside candidates or through press advertisement in employment news,
national dailies or local newspaper as the need be or through internal induction
by issue of internal advertisement/circular for employees, who meet the
prescribed qualifications, job specifications, subject to any instructions issued
by the Central Government issued in this regard from time to time.
Thus, it is evident that in the recruitment rules, there is an option to the
employer to decide the mode of recruitment from amongst those given in
Clause 4.b. The aforesaid policy is admittedly not under challenge.
The Apex Court in Paragraph No.18 of Union of India (UOI) & Others
versus Shankar Prasad Deep & Others (supra), which is exhaustively read
over by Shri Shekhar Sharma has held as under:-
''18. In view of the terms and conditions, stipulated in the relevant
instructions and circulars which have been noted earlier, it is not possible to
accede to the view of the Tribunal that the land oustees are not required to
undergo the process of selection. Though the instructions provided for the
grant of preferential treatment, this is subject to the fulfilment of all other terms
and conditions, stipulated in the instructions. While laying down a policy for
preferential treatment, the Union Government was entitled to stipulate the
conditions subject to which a claim for appointment in Group 'C' and Group
'D' posts for the land oustees could be considered. The Tribunal exceeded the
limits of its adjudicatory authority by virtually substituting its own directions for
the policy which was formulated by the Union Government. Such an exercise,
by its very nature, is impermissible. The terms on which a policy of offering
employment to the land oustees should be framed is a matter to be decided by
the Ministry of Railways. Once this exercise has been carried out, it was, in our
view, neither appropriate nor proper for the Tribunal to trench upon that area''.
Thus, it is apparent that when R.&R policy has been framed by the
Company/Government, the recruitment rules have been put into place by the
State then facet of Article 21 of the Constitution of India will not be attracted in
case of the petitioners because it is not their case that they have been left to
fend for themselves and have not been given any form or mode of employment.
Admittedly, they are already working as outsource employees through a
Contractor. Thus, once there are recruitment rules then they cannot thrust upon
the employer to adopt a particular view and if the Court gets swayed away with
the sentiment of the petitioners then it will be trenching upon that area, which is
not required to be touched by the Court as held by the Apex Court in Union of
India (UOI) & Others versus Shankar Prasad Deep & Others (supra). I
do not find any material to call for any interference in the decision of the
authorities to cause internal recruitment.
Accordingly, these writ petitions fail and are dismissed.
(VIVEK AGARWAL)
JUDGE
amit
