Case Note & Summary
The dispute originated from the acquisition of land bearing Survey No. 57/2 at Mouza Manoli, District Chandrapur, by respondent Western Coalfields Ltd. under the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 for the Dhuptala Open Cast Mine. Petitioner No. 1 had purchased the land from respondent No. 3 and her brothers through a registered sale deed in 2005 and his name was mutated in the revenue records. The acquiring body paid monetary compensation of Rs. 24,51,232 to the petitioners under Clause 8.1 of the Coal India Limited Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy, 2012. The policy also provides for one employment for every two acres of land acquired. Petitioner No. 1 applied on 18.09.2025 nominating his son, petitioner No. 2, for employment. However, the respondent rejected the application by communication dated 08.10.2025 solely on the ground that Regular Civil Suit No. 61 of 2023 filed by respondent No. 3 was pending against the petitioners, challenging their title. Aggrieved, the petitioners approached the High Court seeking quashing of the rejection and a direction to grant employment. The core legal issue was whether pendency of a civil suit can justify denial of employment benefits when the applicant's name appears in the 7/12 record as on the date of Section 9 notification and compensation has been paid. The petitioners argued that the rejection was unjustified and relied on the court's earlier decision in Mirabai Namdeo Gaurkar v. Western Coalfields Ltd. The respondents supported the rejection but conceded that the issue was covered by that judgment. During pendency, the petitioners filed an additional affidavit bringing on record a resolution of the Empowered Committee of Functional Directors dated 22.01.2026 modifying the Standard Operating Procedure to process compensation and R&R claims on an undertaking where no stay order exists from civil court. The court, after considering the earlier judgment which held that civil litigation may consume substantial time and that employment cannot be refused on a specious ground, allowed the petition. It directed the respondents to process the employment application upon the petitioners furnishing an undertaking that if the civil suit is decided against them, they shall resign without claiming any equity or permanency, in line with the Empowered Committee resolution. The impugned communication was set aside and the petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy - Denial of Employment Due to Pending Civil Suit - Coal India Limited Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy, 2012; Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, Section 9 - The court considered whether employment benefit can be withheld solely because a civil suit challenging the landowner's title is pending. Held that when the applicant's name is recorded in 7/12 revenue records as on the date of notification under Section 9, and monetary compensation has been accepted, the employment benefit cannot be refused. Citing Mirabai Namdeo Gaurkar, the court directed the respondents to process the application subject to the petitioners furnishing an undertaking that in case the civil suit is decided against them, they shall resign without claiming equity or permanency. (Paras 14-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether employment under Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy of Coal India Limited, 2012 can be denied on the ground of a pending civil suit challenging title of the landowner, when the landowner's name is recorded in revenue records as on the date of Section 9 notification under the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957.
Final Decision
Writ petition allowed. The impugned communication dated 08.10.2025 is set aside. The respondents are directed to process the petitioners' employment application under the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy upon petitioners furnishing an undertaking and indemnity bond as per the Empowered Committee resolution, subject to the outcome of the pending civil suit. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Employment under R&R policy cannot be denied due to pending title suit
- Section 9 notification date determines eligibility
- 7/12 record conclusive for landowner status
- undertaking safeguards rights
- WCL Empowered Committee SOP modification endorsed
