DEBASISH KAR GUPTA,J. - (1.) The Court : This appeal is directed against the final order dated June 23, 2015 passed in the writ application. The writ application was filed against a reasoned order dated January 3, 2015 passed by the General Manager, Salanpur area, Eastern Coal Field Limited and the relevant portion of the above decision is quoted below: "The Competent Authority of ECL has approved the following decision with respect to the above matter based on the R and R Policy CIL 2000 which was applicable during 'relevant period of time when the application is made by the petitioner' of the above case i.e. application of petitioner dated 15/05/2006 (date of earliest available application of Sri Maji): i. No employment can be offered as applicant claimed employment against less than 2.00 acres of land which is beyond the scope of R and R Policy of CIL 2000. ii. Total amount of Rs. 1,06,000.00/- as one time monetary compensation in lieu of employment against his 1.08 acres of land be given. As such, you are requested to submit your Bank Account number for collecting the amount in cheque."
(2.) The above speaking order was passed by the respondent authority in compliance of the dismissal of a writ application dated September 12, 2014 passed in the matter of Somnath Maji v. Coal India Limited and Ors (in rea) WP No. 1222 of 2013 taking into consideration the fact of undertaking mining operation in respect of a land measuring 1.08 acres belonging to the grandmother of the petitioner. The above writ application was disposed of with the following directions: "The respondent no. 2 is directed to take a decision on the application filed by the petitioner treating him as land losers possessing more than one acre of land on the basis of the previous guidelines within six weeks from the date of communication of this order. It goes without saying that the said authority shall decide the same independently and on the basis of the policy and/or guidelines at the relevant period of time when the application is made by the petitioner and shall thereafter communicate the said decision to the petitioner within a week thereafter. With these observations the writ petition is disposed of. No costs."
(3.) It is submitted by the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant that he was entitled to an appointment in a suitable post on compassionate ground in accordance with the scheme framed by the respondent authority. The next contention of the appellant is that the compensation assessed by virtue of the speaking order is inadequate. The third contention of the appellant is this, he is entitled to interest on the ground assessed towards the compensation due to delayed offers/payment of that amount.;