Shampa Sarkar, J. - (1.) This writ petition has been filed against the inordinate delay and harassment caused to the petitioner by the respondent in providing employment to the petitioner under the land loser scheme of the respondent in which, a provision had been made for providing employment to the land loser or nominee of the land loser if the lands were either used for extraction of coal and/or purchased or acquired by the coal industries for mining operations.
(2.) The case of the petitioner was that his grandfather, namely, Sk. Kubed Maji was the recorded owner of Dag Nos.1936, 1925 and 1927, mouza- Pariharpur, J.L No.23, Police Station-Jamuria, Sub-Registery office-Raniganj. The Eastern Coalfields Limited (hereinafter referred to as the ECL) a subsidiary of Coal India Limited, purchased portions of the above plots of lands from Sk. Kubed Maji under different deeds, measuring about 1.05 acres. According to the petitioners, after the purchase of the land the competent authority of the ECL approved the employment in favour of his grandfather, Kubed Maji, since deceased, and the approval of the appointment was communicated to Kubed Maji by the office of the Dy.CME/Agent vide memorandum No.A/Gir/Survey/9/C-6/93/2005 dated August 16, 1993 but, the final appointment was not made. Subsequently, the approval for employment in favour of the father of the petitioner, Irsad Maji son of Kubed Maji was processed as a nominee of Kubed Maji, as would appear from a communication by the Director Personnel ECL to the General Secretary of CMU (INTUC), that is the union of the coal mine workers under memo No. ECL:HQ:D (P) 34/30. It appears from a letter dated February 22/23, 1995 written by the Area Manager (P.C & D) Sripur area of ECL that the officer-in-charge of Jamuria Police Station was asked by the authorities to certify whether any police case was pending against Sk. Irsad Maji, the father of the petitioner. By a communication dated December 11, 1995, the sub-inspector of police of Sripur area intimated to the officer-in-charge Jamuria Police Station that there was nothing adverse against the petitioner's father Irsad Maji. The police verification report was complete and favourable yet, employment was delayed by the respondents. Thereafter, Irsad Maji wrote a letter to the Chief Personnel Manager, Sripur area ECL through the agent Girmint (R) Colliary ECL, stating, inter alia, that although the employment was approved in his favour under the land losers scheme in 1995 but, due to some typographical errors in his name, the appointment was held up for a long time and finding no other alternative, Irsad Maji had nominated his son, that is, the petitioner, as the grandson of the original land loser late Kubed Maji, for employment under the land loser scheme in place of late Kubed Maji and Irsad Maji. He also informed the officer that all formalities had been completed and the forms and other compliances with regard to the employment had already been filled in and submitted by the petitiner. Irshad Maji requested the authority to give employment to the petitioner. Subsequently, the petitioner himself made a representation before the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, ECL, the General Manager, Sripur Area and the Director Personnel ECL, with a prayer to expedite the process of his appointment under the land loser category as per the scheme/policy framed in this regard. No decision was taken by the authorities. Hence, this writ petition was filed on December 23, 2014.
(3.) Mr. Partha Ghosh, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted, that the grandfather of the petitioner was the original land loser, whose lands were both used and purchased by the ECL. He placed reliance on such averment made in the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondents. He further submitted that there was no factual dispute with regard to the applicability of the scheme in the case of the petitioner in view of the fact that the employment had been approved in case of late Kubed Maji, that is, the petitioner's grandfather. Due to procedural delay and lapse of time Kubed Maji crossed the age bar and in turn nominated his son Irsad Maji, father of the petitioner, for the employment. The employment in favour of Irsad Maji was although approved and police verification report was completed, but, due to some typographical errors which were not corrected by the respondent, the appointment was delayed and thereafter Irsad Maji nominated his son, that is, the petitioner for employment in the mines. Mr. Ghosh submitted, that once the approval of employment of the original land loser and his nominee had been given by the respondents, the denial of employment to the petitioner as the grandson of the original land loser and the nominee's nominee did not arise. According to him, such nomination was permitted under the scheme. He also submitted that under the scheme, tagging of lands was permitted and if the quantum of land used and purchased were tagged together the petitioner was covered by the scheme in question and was eligible for employment. In support of his contention, Mr. Ghosh relied on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Eastern Coalfields Ltd vs. Sk. Nasiruddin, 2012 2 CalHN 100 .;