R.M. Sahai, J. - (1.) The question that arises for consideration in this petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, by the petitioners, who were residents of villages which formed part of Rourkela, is whether the respondents were bound to give employement to all the erswhile residents and even their descendents and in any case to treat them preferentially for employment as they or their members of families were displaced due to setting up of Rourkela Steel Plant even though they were given market value for their land acquired.
(2.) Rourkela Steel Plant, one of the largest steel plants was conceived in the year 1954. It was decided to set it up the Rourkela which at that time consisted of small villages and for this purpose nearly 20000 acres of land were acquired under the Land Acquisition Act. Compensation was paid. When the project was in offing there was probably resistance by local residents, therefore, the State Government issued statement that the displaced persons would be given alternative sites for farming and they would be given jobs in the steel plant. According to petitioners the hopes of the displaced persons were belied as after the steel plant was constructed workers employed from outside and no offer of employment was made to the poor displaced tribals. The petitioners claim that when the then President of India visited Rourkela to inaugurate the first blast furnace of the Rourkela Steel Plant in 1959 a representation was made to him by the Rourkela Displaced Persons Welfare Committee highlighting their grievances and explaining that the alternative sites offered to them were just an eyewash as they were at a distance of about 20 miles from the resettlement colonies and it was impossible for the displaced persons to travel to and from and undertake any agricultural operations. It was also pointed out that in these circumstances the only alternative was to afford gainful employment to the displaced persons in the steel plant. It is pointed out that in 1981 after prolonged discussions an agreement was reached between the Rourkela Steel Plant and the displaced residents of one of the resettlement colonies, namely, Jhirpani Resettlement Colony and it was agreed that the displaced persons would be given employment at the earliest under the T. N. Singh Formula, yet the petitioners all of whom are of Jhirpani Resettlement Colony were not given any employment. According to petitioners the sympathetic sentiments were echoed even in the meeting held on 29th November 1988 but the petitioners and various other unemployed displaced persons numbering nearly 1500 whose list has been attached as Annexure A to the Writ Petition could not secure any employment. In the counter affidavit filed by the Additional Chief Personnel Manager of Rourkela Steel Plant of Steel Authority of India Limited (for short SAIL) these allegations are denied and it is stated that the minutes dated 25th August 1981 have been fully implemented as even though only approximately 2900 families were affected by the land acquisition yet the company has employed 4557 displaced persons. It is further averred that in accordance with the minutes of the meeting held on 25th August 1981 171.50 acres of land was surrendered to the State Government for allotment to the residents of Jhirpani Resettlement Colony and had even been handed over by the respondents to the Government. It is stated that this petition was filed in 1952, that is, 30 to 35 years after the acquisition and now it is even the second and third generation who are seeking employment on the basis of descent which is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The affidavit further states that the company has shared to the extent of 50% the expenditure incurred in the resettlement/rehabilitation of the families in providing infrastructure and other amenities like roads, water supply, health care, education facilities, school etc. All the diplaced persons were given additional amount as housing subsidy of Rs. 200-400/- per family and reclamation subsidy of Rs. 200/- per acre of land. The company has further stated to have provided basic development facilities to the peripheral areas including the resettlement colonies and has incurred huge expenditure. It has been pointed out that due to all this pressure the company had to employ 22538 persons as against the requirement of 19500.
(3.) What is described as T. N. Singh Formula shall be clear from the letter dated 25th July 1973 which is extracted below : "With reference to the letter cited above, I am to say that there is no specific scheme of Govt. to provide employment to displaced persons of Rourkela in the H.S.L. Rourkela. However, Shri T. N. Singh the then Steel Minister of Govt. of India during course of discussion, advised that atleast one person of each displaced family may be provided job in Rourkela Steel Plant. Accordingly Rourkela Land Organisation, Rourkela has prepared family history of displaced persons after spot inquiry. Such list has also been available to the local employment exchange as well as H.S.L. to consider their cases for appointment in H.S.L." There was thus no scheme for employing every displaced person. But in view of the press statement of the State Government the then Union Minister considered it reasonable that the respondents should employ in the Plant at least one member of each family. Whether such assurance of decision was legal and constitutional or not but it was certainly fair and in the larger interest of displaced persons. Its compliance as averred in the counter affidavit could not be seriously disputed.;