M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has prayed for quashing the order as contained in letter dated 19.11.2004 issued by the General ManagCCL, Ranchi whereby the claim of the petitioner for appointment has been refused.
(2.) IT appears that in 1985 the land of the petitioners father was acquired under Land Looser Scheme. The petitioners father applied for appointment in 1994, but because of his over age his appointment was cancelled. In 1995, as advised by the respondents, the petitioner applied for appointment under Land Looser Scheme which has been refused by the impugned order. It is not the case of the petitioner that against the acquisition of the land compensation has not been paid to his father. Besides payment of compensation the petitioner claims employment. It is now well settled that besides payment of compensation the land owner cannot, as a matter of right, claim employment. It is for the authority, for whose benefit land has been acquired, to take the decision for giving employment. In the instant case the land was acquired in 1985 and the compensation was paid. This Court, in such circumstances, cannot issue mandamus directing the respondents to give employment besides compensation, I am, therefore, of the opinion that this Court cannot grant any relief to the petitioner. This writ petition is dismissed.;