- (1.) MR . Jagannath Mahato, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in all the cases, submitted that the petitioners have not been given all the benefits under rehabilitation scheme fully.
(2.) ON the other hand, counsel for the State submitted that in the absence of counter -affidavit they are not in a position to either accept or controvert the statements made in the writ petition. They further submitted that it is not known whether petitioners' claim are genuine or not and that, in some cases, some amount has been paid. They also submitted that if there is any objection, the objectors are to be given opportunity of hearing. In the circumstances, petitioners are given liberty to file fresh representation individually before the concerned authority. If the claims/part of it are found genuine on due verification and after hearing the concerned parties, if any, the same should be provided to them. If the claims/ part of it are hot found genuine, the same should be rejected and the reasons thereof should be communicated to the petitioners. It goes without saying that if any further amount is found payable in any case, the amount already paid, if any, will be adjusted. This exercise should be completed as early as possible and preferably within three months from the date of receipt of such representations. It is made clear that this court has not gone into the merits of the claims of the petitioners. With these observations and directions, these writ petitions stand disposed of. As prayed, let a copy of this order be given to the counsel for the State. ;