Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:39462-DB Court No. - 21 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39471 of 2024 Petitioner :- Brij Nath Singh And Another Respondent :- The Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suyash Bhargava,Vinayak Varma Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Vivek Kumar Singh Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. Heard Sri Vinayak Verma, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri V.K. Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. The petitioners have assailed a communication dated 22.07.2024 by which they have been informed that their applications dated 24.06.2024 and 19.07.2024 for grant of appointment on account of acquisition of their land cannot be granted as the earlier policy dated 16.07.2010 has been withdrawn on 11.11.2019. 3. The admitted fact is that the land of the petitioners comprising of plot no. 167 Village Jarcha, Zamania, District Ghazipur, was acquired by the Railways for Mau Tarighat New Railway Line Project 51 Km. Awards were declared on 10.09.2018 and 08.11.2018. At the relevant time, according to notification dated 16.07.2010 issued by the Railway Board, the land losers were entitled to appointment to PB-1 Pay Band of Rs. 5,200-20,200 with grade pay of Rs. 1,800 only. The petitioners submitted application on 21.06.2022 before the Divisional Railway Manager East Central Railway, Danapur, Patna, Bihar for providing job to petitioner no. 2 i.e. Vinod Yadav. However, when no action was taken on the said application, the petitioners filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court being Writ No. 15984 of 2022 and it was disposed of granting liberty to approach the respondent- Authorities for redressal of grievances. Thereafter, the petitioners filed application on 04.05.2024 and also sent various reminders. Ultimately, by impugned communication, the claim of the petitioners for appointment has been turned down on the ground that the earlier policy of the Railway Board has been withdrawn vide new policy dated 11.11.2019. 4. It is noteworthy that under the new Policy dated 11.11.2019 there is only provision for providing a lump sum amount as rehabilitation compensation without any provision for providing any employment. Paragraph 5 of the revised policy dated 11.11.2019 specifically mentions that the policy shall be effective from the date of issuance of the letter, which as noted above is dated 11.11.2019. 5. In the said backdrop, the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners was noted in our order dated 28.11.2024, and the same is extracted below: "1. Submission is that lands of the petitioners were acquired in the year 2018 and at that time, the policy of the railway as contained in letter dated 28.09.2010 was in vogue. It was withdrawn with the issuance of circular dated 11.11.2019 and the new policy became effective from the date of issue thereof. It is contended that in such circumstances, the reason given in the impugned order for not giving employment to the petitioners is manifestly illegal. 2. Shri V.K. Singh, learned Senior Panel Counsel of Union of India appearing for the respondents prays for and is granted a week's time to obtain instructions on the said aspect. 3. List as fresh on 13 December 2024. " 6. Sri V.K. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the Railways concedes that the land of the petitioners was acquired in the year 2018 and award was also duly made in the said year and, at the relevant time, the policy which was applicable was contained in Board Circular dated 16.07.2010, whereunder there was specific provision for providing employment to the land losers. He is also not in a position to dispute that the new policy dated 11.11.2019 became applicable from the date of issue of the policy i.e. 11.11.2019. Therefore, he is unable to defend the impugned order. However, he submits that the petitioners did not file any application for grant of employment up to the year 2024. He submits that in such circumstances, they are not entitled for the benefit of the old policy. 7. As noted above, the only reason given in the impugned communication is that new policy has come into force with effect from 11.11.2019 and, therefore, the petitioners could not be given benefit of the old policy. 8. We notice that in the earlier policy dated 16.07.2010, there was specific provision for inviting applications for employment from the land losers. It is not clear as to whether any step was taken by the department for making selection on basis of the said policy. 9. These issues, in our opinion, would require consideration at the first instance by the appropriate authority inasmuch as the impugned order is silent on these aspects. Consequently, we quash the impugned communication dated 22.07.2024 and direct respondent no. 3 to accord fresh consideration to the claim of the petitioners by passing a speaking order within eight weeks from the date of communication of the instant order. It shall be open to the petitioners to file fresh representation and documentary evidence in support of their claim. (Anish Kumar Gupta, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.) Order Date :- 19.3.2025/Ruhi H. Digitally signed by :- RUHI HASAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad