Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner contends that neither compensation in lieu of acquisition of land by the respondent -BCCL nor employment in lieu thereof has been given. The petitioner contends that some plot of lands as described in para 5 to the writ petition of Mauja Garbudih, Mauja No. 86, Khata No. 19, Plot Nos. 886, 887, 888, 889, 890 and 891, total area 4 acres 5 decimals were acquired under the Coal Bearing Area (Acquisition and Development) Act in a Land Acquisition Proceeding No. 8/1982 -83. Petitioner's father's share was 177 decimals and petitioner is a co -sharer. According to the petitioner, to his knowledge, no award was prepared in favour of the petitioner neither employment was given. The petitioner has enclosed representations dated 19.2.2013, Annexure -1, 10.7.2013, Annexure -2 as also an objection petition dated 25.10.2013, Annexure -3 along with other objections filed thereafter, Annexure -4 series, for the compensation and employment in lieu of the acquisition of land.
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner fairly admits that no document relating to notification of acquisition nor any order relating to the Land Acquisition Proceeding or award prepared thereunder is with the petitioner and on record to substantiate his contention that he is entitled to compensation. Acquisition, as per petitioner, is of 1982 -83. This writ petition has been preferred after 30 years without enclosing any notification of acquisition or any such proceeding. Petitioner's father appears to be alive as per the description of the petitioner in the array of the parties. All these facts, therefore, lead to only impression that the grievances of the petitioner is unsubstantiated by any material pleadings and documents in support thereof and has been raised after a very long delay of 30 years from the date of acquisition process. In such circumstances, no interference can be made in such a matter. This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.;