1 2025:CGHC:42933 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1982 of 2018 1 - Dharam Das S/o Late Chamru Das Aged About 46 Years R/o Gram Podi, Post Mudhali Tahsil Katghora, District Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Through The Director (Personnel), Seepat, Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Ltd., Gavera Extension Opencast Project, Gavera Area, District Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 3 - Land Revenue Officer, South Eastern Coalfields Ltd., Office Of The General Manager, Gavera Extension Opencast Project, Gavera Area, District Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 4 - Collector, Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Shri Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondents No.1 to 3 : Shri Shubham Bajpayee, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Sudhir Bajpai, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Sanjeev Agrawal, P.L. NIRMALA RAO 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 25.08.2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to provide him with employment in lieu of the acquisition of his land, as per the Rehabilitation Policy of 1991, which was in force at the time when his land was acquired. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the Central Government initiated land acquisition proceedings in 2001 under the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (for short ‘the Act, 1957’). In the present case, the final award was passed in 2011 and the petitioner was displaced from his land for the project. He would further submit that during the acquisition proceedings, respondent No.3 agreed to provide employment to one member of each displaced family as per the Rehabilitation Policy, 1991 issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh. It is contended that respondent No.3 took possession of the land but later did not offer employment to the petitioner on the ground that his landholding was less than 2 acres, and the claim of the petitioner was not covered under the Coal India Limited Policy, 2012. therefore, it is prayed that this petition be allowed and the respondent authorities may be directed to provide employment to the petitioner. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/SECL authorities would submit that the original land owner has already been paid compensation. It is further submitted that, according to the rehabilitation and resettlement policy, there was an assurance to provide employment to one member of the family of the 3 land oustees. He would contend that the writ petitioner has already received compensation amount in lieu of employment. It was also submitted that the petitioner did not disclose this fact in his representation, therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the return filed by the SECL. 5. The chart, as per the return filed by the SECL authorities, is as follows :- Name of the original land oustees Land Survey No. Total Land acquired (in acres) Compens ation amount Date of payment Mode of payment Dharamdas 258/15 0.04 acres 5,00,000/- 11.09.2012 Bank Transfer 6. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has already accepted the additional compensation in lieu of employment, nothing remains for adjudication in this petition. Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach this Court if any cause of action still survives. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi