IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.3161 of 2024 ----- Bibekanand Mahato, S/o Baidyanath Mahato, resident of Jhimri, P.S. Nimdih, District Saraikela-Kharsawan. .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. State of Jharkhand 2. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi. 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Saraikela-Kharsawan. 4. Project Officer, Subarnrekha Project, Chandil. 5. Rehabilitation Officer, Subarnrekha Project, Chandil. 6. District Land Acquisition Officer, Subarnrekha Project, Chandil. .......... Respondents. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Bhawesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Faisal Allam, AC to SC (Mines)-III ----- Order No.08 Date: 21.01.2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to issue “Rehabilitated Family Development Booklet” (popularly known as ‘Vikas Pustika’) to the petitioner under Revised Rehabilitation Policy, 2012 framed by the Department of Water Resources, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi with respect to the land-losers under different irrigation projects. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to acquisition proceeding with respect to the land in question initiated in the year 1986-87 for construction of ‘Chandil Reservoir’ under Subarnrekha Project, Chandil, “Rehabilitated Family Development Booklet” was issued in the name of the petitioner’s father and other family members also mentioning the name of the petitioner, indicating his age as 21 years. As per the Rehabilitation Policy, any member of the displaced family, whose age was 18 years and above on the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is entitled to get a separate “Rehabilitated Family Development Booklet”. Though the petitioner was above 18 years of age at the time of issuance of the said notification, he has not been given separate “Rehabilitated Family Development Booklet” under the Rehabilitation Policy. The petitioner has represented the concerned authorities including the respondent nos.4 & 5 in this regard, however, none of the representations has been considered, which has compelled the petitioner to prefer the present writ petition. 3. Mr. Faisal Allam, learned A.C. to SC (Mines)-III, appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that the aforesaid claim of the petitioner is required to be factually examined by an appropriate authority. Hence, if the petitioner prefers a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no.5, an appropriate decision in accordance with law will be taken within timeframe. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of prayer made by the petitioner, without entering into merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to file a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no.5. On receipt of the said representation, the -2- W.P.(C) No.3161 of 2024 respondent no.5, after examining relevant records of the case and on providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, if so required, shall take an appropriate informed decision within six weeks from the date of filing of the representation. 5. If the petitioner is found entitled to receive separate “Rehabilitated Family Development Booklet” the same shall be issued in favour of the petitioner within four weeks thereafter. 6. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Sanjay/ -3- W.P.(C) No.3161 of 2024