RANCHI, India, March 4 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Jan. 3:

1. Heard Learned counsel for the parties.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief :-

"(a) for issuance of a writ or writs, direction or directions commanding upon the respondents no.1 to 3 in particular to provide job to the petitioner and make payment of the claimed compensation for the land which have been acquired by the respondents situated in Jamabandi No.46, mouza Neem Kala No.41, total area 24 Bigha 7 Katha, out of which 7.79 acres land have been acquired by the respondents as far back in the year 1981 and 0.26 acre of land have been acquired under CBA (A & D) by the Eastern Coalfield Limited Project, Rajmahal in the year 1987 and yet neither the job as per the Rule and Scheme of the Eastern Coalfield Limited nor the full claim and compensation has been paid to the petitioner as such, a direction may be made upon the respondents to provide job and compensation to the petitioner under the respondent no.1 to 3 as being the land looser forthwith in view of the letter of the Area Manager (PCD & E), Rajmahal Area of the original letter dated 16.11.2017."

3. The land in question has been acquired in the year 1981 and 1987 and for which compensation as well as employment has already been given.

4. Earlier, a writ petition being W.P.(C) No.2113 of 2018 was filed by the petitioner and his brother and on filing of the counter affidavit, the same has been dismissed as withdrawn. The order dated 12.02.2021 (Annexure -2), passed in W.P.(C) No.2113 of 2018 reads as under :-

"This case is taken up through video conferencing. Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition. Mr. Mithilesh Singh, learned G.A.IV appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.4 and 5, and Mr. Rajesh Lala, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.1 to 3 have no objection. Permission is accorded. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn."

5. Thereafter, again the present writ petition has been filed for the same cause of action.

6. It is not only a stale claim, but also repetition of a petition without any reason.

7. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to entertain the present writ petition. Accordingly, it is, hereby, dismissed.

8. Pending interlocutory application, if any, stands disposed of.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.