Barin Ghosh, J. - (1.) Petitioner No. 1 is the ex-owner of a piece of cultivable land measuring about 15 cottahs. There is no dispute that the said plot of land was acquired on the request of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. for the purpose of expanding its bottling plant at Budge Budge. There is also no dispute that while the said plot of land of the petitioner No. 1 was acquired, lands belonging to others in the vicinity were also acquired for the self-same purpose. There is no dispute that such acquisitions have been made in terms of and upon duly complying with the provisions contained in the Land Acquisition Act, 1948. It has been suggested in the petition that Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. as well as the State- respondents held out that Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. shall provide employment to the family members of the land losers subject to certain conditions as regards age, educational qualification, etc. It is the grievance of the petitioners that in breach of such promise or holding out no employment has been given to the petitioner No. 1 or to any of his family members, but employments have been given to other land losers or their family members and hence this writ petition.
(2.) Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. is an authority within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. It is a Government Company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956. There is no dispute that it is a public enterprise. Being an authority within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, it is bound to adhere to the provisions of the Constitution insofar as the same relate to fundamental right.
(3.) In the matter of appointments there cannot be any discrimination thus says Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, which guarantee equality in relation thereto as a fundamental right. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., therefore, in the matter of giving appointment cannot discriminate. There being no dispute that the lands in question were acquired upon complying with the provisions contained in the Land Acquisition Act, 1948 and there being no mandate in the said Act to give appointment by an instrumentality of a State by while acquiring any type of land by way of compensation or otherwise, I called upon the respondents to file affidavits to state as to on which policy these appointments were promised. The Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. has not filed any affidavit but the State-respondents have. In that it has been stated that a rehabilitation package was formed by the State Government in consultation with the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. so as to minimise the chance of litigation by aggrieved people or by the land losers and that rehabilitation package, inter alia, provided that the land losers or their family members should get priority in recruitment to be made by the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. provided the person to be recruited meets the necessary criteria laid down by the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. as to age, qualification etc. In this connection reference was made to a letter of the District Magistrate of the concerned District addressed to the Deputy General Manager, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. with copies to Special Secretary, Commerce and Industries Department and to Additional District Magistrate (Development) of the concerned District. In that it was stated that in addition to compensation payable under the Land Acquisition Act, 1948, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. is to take a practical view of all the aspects involved in the process of acquisition of land and accordingly a rehabilitation package is required to be propounded to minimise the chances of litigation by aggrieved people and also for pre-empting any antagonistic stand of the land losers which may adversely affect the project. The rehabilitation package was then proposed. In that it was, inter alia, contended that preference may be given to the members of the land losing families for enrolling their names in the nearest Employment Exchange and the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. should give priority to such enrolled persons while making recruitments as per the qualification/other requirements to be determined by the Indian Oil Corporation. It was then added that by following the procedure as suggested in the said rehabilitation package local problems have been minimised and the time schedule of the concerned project has been adhered to. It appears that such proposals were accepted by the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., and by a letter dated 10th December, 1993 it confirmed to the District Magistrate of the concerned District that preference will be given to land losers for employment as per requirements of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., provided the land losers fulfilled certain criterias mentioned in the said letter. The criterias, as were mentioned, provide, inter alia, that the name of the land loser must be enrolled in the Employment Exchange and their list should be authenticated by the District Magistrate of the concerned District and such land losers should meet eligibility norms of age, relaxation may be given for them, qualification for which no relaxation shall be given and experience. It further appears that subsequent thereto Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., distributed hand-bills reiterating the above. It further appears that the Joint Secretary to the Government of West Bengal also gave blessings to the said arrangements made by the District Magistrate of the concerned District with the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. He, however, stated that only one member of the uprooted/affected family shall be eligible for a job.;