Arijit Pasayat, J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Appellant calls in question legality of judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Jabalpur Bench. Background facts leading to filing of the appeal are as follows : Respondent No.1-Prem Kumar Sharma filed a writ Petition before the High Court claiming appointment on the ground that he was a land loser. High Court by its order dated 8.8.2001 directed consideration by the Sub-Divisional Officer. Since the Sub-Divisional officer held that he was entitled to employment, a writ petition was filed by the appellant before the High Court. The High Court held that since the land of the respondent No. 1 had been acquired, he was entitled for compensatory appointment. The High Court gave the following directions: "The petitioner is directed to extend the employment to the son/defendant as the case may be of respondent No.3, within a period of twelve months from today, on availability of first vacancy with the petitioner. In case no vacancy arises within the period, the petitioner shall create a post for the employment, in this regard."
(3.) Questioning correctness of the judgment, a Letters Patent Appeal was filed by the appellant before the Division Bench of the High Court. By the impugned judgment, the High Court modified the direction to the following extent: "On due consideration of the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, we direct the petitioner to consider the case of respondent No. 3 Prem Kumar Sharma for the employment to his son/dependent as the case may be whenever the vacancy arises." ;