Protik Prakash Banerjee, J. - (1.) Four writ petitions have come before this Court involving similar facts and circumstances and thus, the same point of law. I therefore heard the writ petitions together and intended to pass a common judgment which would have governed all of them. After completing the judgments, however, the matter was mentioned before me on April 11, 2019 by the common learned advocate for the writ petitioners appearing in all the cases. He apprised me of the death of the writ petitioner in WP No.20536 (W) Of 2012 even before I had heard the cases. Accordingly, I direct that WP No.20536 (W) of 2012 be delisted and a separate order be recorded therein, allowing steps to be taken in accordance with law, if so advised. A photocopy of this order shall be retained in the file of WP No.20537(W) of 2012 and WP No.20538 (W) of 2012. Therefore, the present judgment will govern only the present WP No.20533 (W) of 2012 and also WP No.20537 (W) of 2012 and WP No.20538 (W) of 2012. In each of the writ petitions, the order dated May 12, 2012 passed by the respondent no. 6, the General Manager of the Satgram Area of the respondent no. 4 has been challenged. In each of the writ petitions a prayer has been made for appointment of the concerned writ petitioner as a land loser (spelt "land looser" in the petitions). A copy of this order countersigned by the court officer shall be retained in the files of the said other three writ petitions.
(2.) By the said order dated May 12, 2012 the claims of all the four petitioners in the respective writ petitions for employment under the respondent no. 4 was rejected on the sole ground that the lands in question were "divested/transferred after the date of acquisition by ECL, so it is not legal. It is further mentioned that there is no relationship between land owner and the land losers which is the prime criteria for employment under land loser scheme. Hence the offering employment under land loser scheme in the instant case is not maintainable as per the Co.'s guidelines. Therefore, the employment claim of the above petitioners is rejected."
(3.) It is not in dispute that the lands in question belonged to one Narayandas Bandyopdhyay who transferred it by registered instruments to Deb Kumar Mukherjee on December 16, 1981, Satyajit Bandyopadhyay on December 11, 1981, and to Sk. Imadul Haque and Ajit Kumar Mondal by two several deeds dated December 14, 1981. It is also not in dispute that Deb Kumar Mukherjee was the beneficiary of a further 2.08 acres of land under a probated will of the said Narayandas Bandyopadhyay making him the owner of 3.08 acres of land after adding the 1 acre purchased by him as above.;