RANCHI, India, April 18 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on March 17:
1. Heard the parties.
2. The Khatiyani Raiyat and grandfather had applied for job in lieu of acquisition of land. As there was no statutory provision or any obligation to provide job, the same was rejected. The father initially also applied for the same but it was also not considered. Now this petitioner who is the grandson of the Khatiyani Raiyat, has approached this Court, seeking appointment in lieu of land acquisition.
3. Admittedly, the petitioner was also not born when the land was acquired sometime in the year 1969. In an exactly the similar matter, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Sanjeev Kumar Vs. State of Haryana & Ors." order passed in Special Leave to Appeal(C) Nos.30798/2025 at paragraph No.3 has held as
"3. Under the provisions of the Act, on the land being acquired, the petitioner or his family is entitled only to the compensation which has already been paid. There is no provision for grant of job in lieu of the acquired land. The policy decision, if any, of giving job in lieu of the acquired land cannot prevail over the statutory provisions and as such, we find no error or illegality on the part of the authorities and the High Court in dismissing the claim of the petition for job, which was filed after more than 18 years of the framing of the policy."
4. The case in hand is much on a better footing on facts as there is no policy on the respondent-State or AIADA / JIADA to give employment. When there is no policy, the petitioner does not have any right to seek employment in lieu of acquisition of land when compensation has already been granted to the grandfather i.e., the original land looser. Thus, this writ petition is dismissed.
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
