JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Mr. Jagannath, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner submitted that the only grievance of the petitioner is that in
spite of repeated requests, Vikas Pustika has not been issued to her.
Learned state counsel submitted that in the absence of
counter affidavit, he is not in a position to accept or controvert the
submissions made by the petitioner.
(2.) In the circumstances, the petitioner is permitted to make a
representation addressed to respondent no. 2 - The Rehabilitation
Officer No. 1, Subernrekha Project, Adityapur, Saraikella-Kharsawan,
respondent no. 3 - The Additional Director Land Acquisition and
Rehabilitation, Subernrekha Project Bhawan, Saraikella-Kharsawan
and respondent no. 4- The D. C., Saraikella-Kharsawan in that regard.
(3.) If it is found that the petitioner is entitled to Vikas Pustika, it should be
issued to her. However, it it is found that she is not entitled to that, the
reasons thereof should be communicated to her. This exercise should
be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of
such representation.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.