JUDGMENT 1. This writ petition is by ten petitioners. They have sought for the following reliefs: – "(a) A Rule do issue of and under the seal of this Hon'ble Court asking the respondents and each one of them to show cause as to why a writ of or a writ in the nature of Mandamus should not go commanding them thereby to give appointment to the petitioners at Haldia Dock Complex and/or respondents forthwith according to the qualification and eligibility of the petitioners. (b) A Rule issue out of and under the seal of this Hon'ble Court asking the respondents and each one of them to show cause as to why a writ of or a writ in the nature of Certiorari should not go directing them thereby to certify and transmit to the Hon'ble Court all records and proceedings relating to this case so that conscionable Justice may therein be administered by passing appropriate order and/or directions upon the respondents to give employment to the petitioners according to their qualification and eligibility in the said Haldia Dock Complex and/or Calcutta Port Trust under the respondents (c) An interim order of injunction be granted restraining the respondents from employing any further employment in Class-III and Class-IV Category at the Haldia Dock Complex till the disposal of the application (d) Rule in terms of Prayers (a) and (b) above be issued. (e) Interim orders in terms of Prayer (c) above be granted. (f) Pass such other or further order or orders as to your Lords ships may seem fit and proper." 2. In Paragraph 1 of the petition, the petitioners have contended as follows: – "1. That your petitioners-state that they are all residents of different villages under Police Station Haldia, District-Midnapore. The petitioners-state that they were owners and occupiers of small piece of agricultural as well as homestead lands of Village Hatiberia, Chiranjibpur and Dakshin Ranichak etc. Police Station Haldia, District Midnapore. The said agriculture lands owned by the respective petitioners were the only source of their livelihood. Save and except those lands the petitioners had no other agricultural lands and/or homestead lands elsewhere. In this connection, the particulars of your petitioners and the particulars of the lands of your petitioners' families are given. 3. Police Station Haldia, District Midnapore. The said agriculture lands owned by the respective petitioners were the only source of their livelihood. Save and except those lands the petitioners had no other agricultural lands and/or homestead lands elsewhere. In this connection, the particulars of your petitioners and the particulars of the lands of your petitioners' families are given. 3. It is the case in the petition that the lands of the petitioners have been acquired for the use and need of Haldia Dock Complex and as a result of such acquisition the petitioners have been uprooted and they became homeless people. It has then been contended that the petitioners at present are meeting their livelihood as hired labourers. It has been next contended in the petition that the petitioners are registered with the Local Employment Exchange. The petitioners have then relied on Land Loser's Certificates. They have been relied on a circular issued by the Government of West Bengal dated 17th October, 1977 as well as the amendment effected thereto by circular dated 13th August, 1979. They also relied on a Circular dated 12th May, 1986, issued by the Government of West Bengal. These Circulars are as follows: – "Government of West Bengal Labour Department From: The Chief Secretary to the Government of West Bengal To: 1. The Commissioner 2. The Secretary 3. The District Magistrate No. 5120 (60) LW Dated, Calcutta the 17th October 1977 Sub: – Compulsory recruitment through Employment Exchanges in all Non-PSC Vacancies in the State Government Establishments, State Government Undertakings, Quasi-Government Establishments and Local Bodies. Sir, I am directed to state that Government have decided that in future all recruitment in the State Government Establishments. The State Government Undertakings, Quasi-Government Establishments and Local Bodies under tile Government shall be made through the Employment Exchanges with a view to providing equal opportunity to all in the State in the matter of employment. In pursuance of this decision, henceforward, all recruitment in posts under the Government should be made strictly according to the procedure laid down below: – 1. In pursuance of this decision, henceforward, all recruitment in posts under the Government should be made strictly according to the procedure laid down below: – 1. All vacancies arising in State Government Establishments, State Government Undertakings, Quasi-Government Establishments and Local Bodies where recruitment is not made through Public Service Commission or by way of normal absorption of personnel declared surplus by the Government as a rule, be filled up through the Employment Exchange (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1950, all employing authorities under the State Government including the State Government Undertakings and Quasi-Government Establishments, Local Bodies shall notify to the appropriate Employment Exchanges all vacancies that may occur in their establishments from time to time. 2. In the following categories of cases, however, the Employment Authorities will be competent without referring to the Employment Exchange to give appointments: – (i) To candidate hailing from families who might have been uprooted from their places of residence as a result of the land in question being acquired by the Government for Development Projects like setting up a power plant or a township etc., as at Haldia. Only one member from an uprooted family shall be eligible for such special preference for jobs in and around the area acquired. (ii) To a son/daughter/near relation of a Government servant who dies in harness leaving his family in immediate need of assistance, such compassionate appointments should be made provided the deponent possesses prescribed qualifications according to recruitment rules. (iii) To trade apprentices who might have had training in the undertakings to the skilled or semi-skilled posts in the Government Industrial Undertakings, in preference to others, provided they have the requisite qualifications for the job and their names was enrolled with the Employment Exchange. (iv) To suitable Ex-industrial Census personnel who were retrenched with effect from the 1st February, 1975 by the Cottage and Small Scale Industries Department of the State Government, Ex-census Employees who have not been absorbed in service either under the State Government or in any Public Sector Undertaking of the State Government, and Ex-employees of Refugees, Relief and Rehabilitation Department of State Government (Ex-sibir Karmacharies who served in connection with the Relief and Rehabilitation of the Refugee from Pakistan and Bangladesh) who have put in at least six months continue service in their previous jobs. 3. 3. The Government will otherwise also be free to first absorb or direct the absorption, in existing or new vacancies, of staff which may be surplus to existing requirement. 4. 10% of the vacancies in each of the categories of Class III post and 20% of the vacancies in each of the categories of Class IV posts shall be reserved for being filled by Ex-servicemen in accordance with the Ex-serviceman (Reservation of Vacancies in the State Service and Posts, Class III and Class IV) Rules, 1975. 5. Names of unemployed persons are to be forwarded to the employers by the Employment Exchange generally in order of seniority, that is to say, length of the period of enrolment. The idea is that where other factors and requirements in respect of qualification are identical, priority in the matter of appointment is to be given to those who enroll their names earlier unless they have already been given adequate chances or are already employed in comparable scales. Other provisions of the Employment Exchange manual shall be strictly followed. 6. In order to enable the employing authorities to fulfill the requirements of West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of Vacancies in Service and Posts) Act, 1976, the (Employment Authorities) name of an adequate number of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates enrolled with them, even though these candidates might not satisfy the test of seniority as in (5) above. The Employment Exchanges should also try to give greater priority to candidates from backward areas, Government will issue Executive instructions as to which areas are to be treated as backward for this purpose. It will be incumbent upon the Employment Authorities indicate which of the costs are to be filled up by Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates when they seek for names from the Exchanges. 7. It has been decided that the abovementioned measures will come into force with immediate effect. I am, therefore, to request you to please instruct all the subordinates offices and undertakings under your Administrative Offices and undertakings under your Administrative Control to strictly comply with the abovementioned decisions in matters of recruitment. 7. It has been decided that the abovementioned measures will come into force with immediate effect. I am, therefore, to request you to please instruct all the subordinates offices and undertakings under your Administrative Offices and undertakings under your Administrative Control to strictly comply with the abovementioned decisions in matters of recruitment. Yours faithfully Sd/- Chief Secretary to the Government of West Bengal Government of West Bengal Labour Department Calcutta the 13th August, 1979 Corrigendum In the Labour Department Circular No. 5120 (60) LW dated 17.10.1977 for the word appearing in the sub-paragraphs (1), (2) substitute the following, viz: – (i) To candidates, hailing from families who might have been uprooted from their places of residence or whose main source of income affected due to loss of agricultural land, as a result of the land in question being secured by the Government for Development Projects like setting up a power plant or a township etc. as in Haldia only one member from an uprooted affected family shall be eligible for such special preference for jobs in and around the area acquired. Sd/- A.K. Sen Chief Secretary to the Government of West Bengal Government of West Bengal Labour Department Calcutta the 12th May, 1986 MEMORANDUM Sub: Constitution of a Screening Committee for sponsoration names of persons affected by acquisition of land for Development Projects at Haldia. In terms of Memo No. 5220 (60) LW dated October 17, 1977 read with Memo No. 1744-Emp dated August 13, 1979 of the Labour Department, the employing authorities are competent to give appointment without reference to Employment Exchange to Candidates from families who have been uprooted from their place of residence or whose main source of income from agriculture has been affected on account of acquisition of the land in question for the purpose of any Development Project. The implementation of the aforesaid order has been carefully examined by the Government with reference to employment at various projects set up at Haldia. It is felt that in the interest of effective enforcement of the orders, candidates should be empanelled and sponsored for employment to the authorities concerned by the Employment Officer of Project Employment Exchange (P.E.E.), Haldia on the basis of recommendation of a Screening Committee. 2. It is felt that in the interest of effective enforcement of the orders, candidates should be empanelled and sponsored for employment to the authorities concerned by the Employment Officer of Project Employment Exchange (P.E.E.), Haldia on the basis of recommendation of a Screening Committee. 2. The Government is accordingly pleased to constitute a Screening Committee with following members: – (i) Additional of D.M., Tamluk Chairman (ii) A representation of Haldia Development Authority Member (iii) Special Land Acquisition Collector, Haldia Member (iv) M.L.A., Sutahata Member (v) Chairman, Haldia Notified Area Authority Member (vi) Additional S.D.O., Haldia Member (vii) Rehabilitation Officer, Haldia Member (viii) E.O.-in-Charge, P.E.E., Haldia Member-Convenor 3. The Screening Committee will prepare (1) a combined list in order of priority for families affected by acquisition of land for the Haldia Dock Complex, the Refinery of Indian Oil Corporation and the Fertilizer Plant of Hindusthan Fertilizer Corporation and (2) a separate list for each of the other major projects located at Haldia other than above. 4. As stipulated in Memo No. 5120 (60) LW dated 17.10.1977 only one member of a family will be eligible for appointment. The beneficiary should be either an awardee of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act or a heir of such a person. If a member of a family is already in the employment under the State or the Central Government or a Company in either private or public sector, no member of the family will be considered for employment. Further the candidates must be a resident of the area bounded by the River Hooghly, the River Haldia and the Hijli Tidal Canal. The definition of a family for the purpose of this circular will be the same as in the West Bengal Land Reforms Act. 5. The order of priority in the list will be determined by the date of acquisition in chronological order. Against the families whose lands have been acquired at more or less the same time, the following order or priority should be fixed: – (a) Landless agricultural labour, bargadar, marginal and small farmers and non-agricultural labour whose homestead had been acquired. (b) (i) Bargadars, Marginal farmers and Small farmers. (ii) Physically handicapped persons. (iii) Persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Tribes. (iv) Other person. Provided that their main source of income has been affected by acquisition of the agricultural land in question. 6. (b) (i) Bargadars, Marginal farmers and Small farmers. (ii) Physically handicapped persons. (iii) Persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Tribes. (iv) Other person. Provided that their main source of income has been affected by acquisition of the agricultural land in question. 6. The priority lists should contain the names of the persons seeking employment the quantum of agricultural of homestead land acquired and the quantum of presently owned by the family the employment status of the members of the family. The employment Officer-in-Charge of Project Employment Exchange, Haldia will sponsor name from the lists against vacancies notified by the Employment Authority concerned on a basis of priority. 7. This issues in supersession of (i) para 3.3 of Labour Department G.O. No. 129(60) LW dated 25.1.1978 and (ii) concluding para of Labour Department G.O. No. 2700-Emp dated 14.10.1980 so far as Haldia is concerned. Sd/- Chief Secretary, Calcutta the 12th May, 1986 Copy forwarded for information and necessary action to: – The Chairman, Haldia Notified Area Authority, P.O. Haldia, District Midnapore. Sd/- Assistant Secretary." 4. The petition then referred to a judgment of the Supreme Court delivered on 6th April, 1994 modified by an order dated 12th August, 1994, to which I shall refer to at the appropriate time. The petitioners; thereafter referred to few orders passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court whereby directions were given to consider the case of persons similarly situate that of the petitioners in the light of the above judgment of the Supreme Court. It was then contended that the petitioners are similarly placed but their cases of employment are not being considered. That is why the petitioners have filed the instant petition seeking the above reliefs. 5. In the petition, the petitioners have annexed copies of nine Land Loser's Certificates issued by the Additional Land acquisition Officer, Haldia, three certificates issued by the Rehabilitation Officer, Haldia Dock Project and one certificate issued by the Chairman, Haldia Notified Area Authority. The Land Loser's Certificates are as follow: – GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER (HALDIA) AT TAMLUK, MIDNAPORE LAND LOSER'S CERTIFICATE Certified that Sri/Smt..............son/daughter (wife of..........., Village............P.O...........P. S..............District............is a land' loser/an evictee in respect of L.A. Case No........of 19.............of Mouza..........P.S.................District Midnapore. His/Her land (s) acquired in connection with..................is/are detailed below. The date of possession is............and that of payment is.......... Special/Additional Land Acquisition Officer (Haldia), Tamluk. Date.................. His/Her land (s) acquired in connection with..................is/are detailed below. The date of possession is............and that of payment is.......... Special/Additional Land Acquisition Officer (Haldia), Tamluk. Date.................. Place: Tamluk, Midnapore. 6. None of the Land Losers Certificates, copies whereof have been annexed to the petition is in the name of any of the petitioners except one issued in the name of the petitioner no. 10. The first of such certificates is in the name of Sk. Ader, son of Sk. Amir of Village Chiranjibpur, P.O. Debhog, P.S. Sutahata and in respect of structure. The second of such certificates in the name of Sk. Ader, son of Sk. Amir of Village Hatiberia, P.O. Hatiberia, P.S. Haldia in respect of Bastu. The third one is in the name of Tapadhan Hutait. The fourth one is in the name of Sirish Chandra Das. Fifth one is in the name of Manmatha Nath Maity. The sixth one is in the name of Gopal Ch. Acharya. The seventh one is in the name of Makhan Bala Das. The eighth one is in the name of Sunil Kumar Paik, son of Nalini Kanta Paik in respect of structure and the ninth one is in the name of Nalini Kanta Paik. The 1st of the certificates issued by the Rehabilitation Officer, Haldia Dock Project, Midnapore, certifies that Sri Amulya Charan Samanta father of Sri Chittaranjan Samanta and Sri Shyama Charan Samanta was the owner of a plot of land which has been acquired in connection with Haldia Port. The end of such certificates certifies that Sri Amulya Charan Samanta was the owner of a plot of land which has been acquired in connection with the establishment of Haldia Port and the 3rd of such certificates certifies that Sasadhar Prodhan was the owner of the plot of land which was acquired in connection with establishment of Haldia Port. The only certificate issued by the Chairman, Haldia Notified Area Authorities, certifies that Sri Dibyendu Prodhan is the son of Sri Sasadhar Prodhan and Sri Sasadhar Prodhan is an evicted person by acquisition of a plot of land acquired in connection with establishment of Haldia Port. It is claimed that first and second of the Land Losers Certificates refer to the petitioner No.1. The third refers to the petitioner No.2. It is claimed that first and second of the Land Losers Certificates refer to the petitioner No.1. The third refers to the petitioner No.2. The fourth refers to the petitioner No.3, fifth refers to the petitioner No.7, 6th refers to the petitioner No.8, 7th refers to the petitioner No.9 and 8th and 9th refer to the petitioner No. 10. The first and second certificates issued by the Rehabilitation Officer, Haldia Dock Project, it is claimed, refer to the petitioner No.4. The third of such certificate, it is claimed, refers to the petitioner No.6 and similarly, the certificate issued by the, Chairman, Haldia Notified Area Authority refers to the petitioner No.6. There is no certificate which refers to the petitioner No.5. 7. The petition was moved after service upon the Special Land Acquisition Officer, being the respondent No.11 herein who did not cause an appearance to be made at that time. Ultimately, however, he appeared before me when by an order dated 20th November, 1998, I asked him to file an affidavit stating therein as to on what authority Land Losers certificates are being issued and which records are being consulted for issuing of those certificates and if those certificates are Land Losers certificates duly issued in accordance with law, why the Screening Committee of which the Special Land Acquisition Officer is a member, has not yet considered the said certificates and sponsored the names of the petitioners. 8. In the meantime a supplementary affidavit was filed by the petitioners. In that it was stated as follows: – "2. I state that it would be evident from the, Notice to Sk. Ader, the father of petitioner No.1 that the family of the said petitioner is a bona fide land evictee and/or dislodged from their entire land. 3. It would further be evident from the Notices to Sri Tapadhan Hutait, the Grandfather of petitioner No.2 that the family of the said petitioner is a bona fide land loser. 4. It would also be evident from the Notices to Sri Sirish Das, the Grandfather of Subas Ranjan Das, the petitioner No.3 that the family of the said petitioner is a bona fide land-evictee and/or dislodged from their entire land. 5. 4. It would also be evident from the Notices to Sri Sirish Das, the Grandfather of Subas Ranjan Das, the petitioner No.3 that the family of the said petitioner is a bona fide land-evictee and/or dislodged from their entire land. 5. It would further be evident from the Notices to Sri Amulya Charan Samanta, the Grandfather of Siddhartha Samanta, the petitioner No.4 that the family of the said petitioner is a bona tide land loser. 6. It would be evident from the notice to Sri Gunadhar Dinda, the Grandfather of Saktipada Dinda, the petitioner No.5 that the family of the said petitioner is a bona fide land loser. 7. It would be evident from the Notices to Sri Sasadhar Prodhan the father of the petitioner No.6 that the family of the said petitioner is a bona fide land-evictee and/or dislodged from their entire lands. 8. It would be evident from the payment notice to the petitioner, No.8 that the family of the said petitioner is a bona fide land evictee and/or dislodged from their entire land. 9. It would be evident from the possession notice to Smt. Makhan Bala Das, the Aunt of the petitioner No.9 that the family of the petitioner is a bona fide land loser. 10. It would also be evident from the payment notice to Sri Nalini Kanta Paik, the father of the petitioner No.10 that the family of the said petitioner is a bona fide land-evictee and/or dislodged from their entire land. Xerox copies of all the said notices including payment/possession notices are annexed hereto and marked with Letter 'C' collectively." 9. In Annexure 'C' to the said supplementary affidavit a copy of a notice calling upon persons having interest in a particular land to raise objections, if any, for acquisition of such land was included. That notice though describes the land but has not been directed against anyone in particular. The second document forming part of Annexure 'C' to the said supplementary affidavit is a copy of a notice directing the owners and occupiers of a particular land to deliver possession thereof on a particular date to a particular person but it has not been mentioned in the said notice as to who were the owners of the said land. The second document forming part of Annexure 'C' to the said supplementary affidavit is a copy of a notice directing the owners and occupiers of a particular land to deliver possession thereof on a particular date to a particular person but it has not been mentioned in the said notice as to who were the owners of the said land. The 3rd document is a notice intimating particular person that on a particular date possession of a plot of land would be taken and in the meantime the notified person must vacate the land in question. From the copy of the notice annexed the name of the person against whom the said notice was issued cannot be deciphered. The next document has been issued to a person asking him to collect compensation but the name of the notified a person cannot be deciphered from the copy annexed. The next notice is identical to that of the previous one discussed above. The next four notices are similar to that of the first notice discussed above. The next three notices are identical to the fourth document discussed above except that the notifying party can be deciphered and he is Sirish Chandra Das, son of Priyanath Das. The next two notices are identical to that of the fourth document. The next document is similar to that of the third document but the notifying party who is Amulya Charan Samanta, son of Bhajahari. The next document is a notice asking Amulya Charan Samanta, son of Bhajahari to collect the compensation. The next two documents are identical to the document No.4 mentioned above but the name of the notifying party has mentioned is Sasadhar Prodhan, son of Pasupati Prodhan. The next document is identical to the document No.4 mentioned above but the notifying party is decipherable and he is Gopal Chandra Acharya, son of Bhutnath Acharya. The next document is also identical to the document No.4 and the notifying party is Makhan Bala Das, son of Ashini Das. The last document too is identical to the document No.4 and the notifying party is Nalini Kanta Paik, son of Bhim Paik. 10. In terms of the order passed by me on 20th November, 1998, the Additional District Magistrate, Haldia filed and affidavit and in that contended as follows: – "2. The last document too is identical to the document No.4 and the notifying party is Nalini Kanta Paik, son of Bhim Paik. 10. In terms of the order passed by me on 20th November, 1998, the Additional District Magistrate, Haldia filed and affidavit and in that contended as follows: – "2. That in pursuance of the order dated 20.11.1998 I have taken immediate steps for searching the relevant Government Circulars and/or Government orders, if any, regarding issuance of Land Loser's Certificate. In the Special Land Acquisition Office at Haldia and the District Land and Land Reforms Office at Midnapore all the available documents, Government Circulars and orders were searched but no specific Government Order or Government Circular regarding issue of Land Losers' Certificate was found. 3. That necessary steps are also being taken for searching the aforesaid document from the Department of Land and Land Reforms, Writers' Building at Calcutta but in spite of due deligence no documents as such has yet been traced out although for the same frantic efforts are going on and some more time is required for searching the specific order to show the authority to issue Land losers' Certificate by the Special/Additional Land Acquisition Officer, (Haldia) and the Rehabilitation Officer, Haldia Project, Midnapore, if any. 4. That as per the provision of the Act, the land acquisition process since publication of notifications under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 till preparation of the awards had to pass through different stages and in such every stage some valuable records, viz., land schedule, copy of ROR's Rate Reports, calculation sheets, award notes, award statement etc. are prepared. 5. That the aforesaid records are preserved in the Record Room under the custody of the Special L.A.O. The certificates are being issued on these basis and on consultation of those records. The certificates contain the following essentials: – (i) Name, Father's name and address of the awardee. (ii) L.A. case no. with year. (iii) Plot No. with area, share and classification. (iv) Award No. (v) Status whether evicted or land loser or structure awardee etc. 6. The certificates contain the following essentials: – (i) Name, Father's name and address of the awardee. (ii) L.A. case no. with year. (iii) Plot No. with area, share and classification. (iv) Award No. (v) Status whether evicted or land loser or structure awardee etc. 6. That during preparation of a certificate all the above particulars are derived from the land acquisition records which had been preserved in the Record Room of the Special L.A.O. Award is very much a public document, issuance of certificate on such public document is a prevailing system which is also being followed in this project. 7. That out of the 10 petitioners, it is seen from the available records with employment Officer, Project Employment Exchange, Haldia only the case of Sk. Khadem, S/o Sk. Ader could be traced for want of reference date of applying before the Screening Committee. 8. It is worthy to state that the case of Sk. Khadem was rejected since only a structure was acquired with no mention of acquisition of any land/bastu and the case of Sk. Khadem was disposed of on 15.7.1997." 11. Subsequent thereto the Additional District Magistrate, Haldia, filed another affidavit. In that he stated as follows: – "3. That as per the provision of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the land acquisition process since publication of notification under Section 4, sub-section (1) of the Land Acquisition Act till preparation of the Awards there are different stages and in such every stages some valuable records, viz., land schedule, copy of ROR's, Rate Report, Calculation Sheets. Award Notes, Award Statement etc. are prepared. 4. That the aforesaid records are preserved in Record Room under the custody of the Special Land Acquisition Officer, herein the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Haldia. 5. That as per long standing practice since inception the Special Land Acquisition Officer who is also custodian of all relevant records relating to land acquisition of the respective area used to issue Land loosing Certificates on the basis and on consultation of the aforesaid records and herein also the Land Loosing Certificates are being issued on the basis of such aforesaid records and on consultation of those records. It is worthy to state here that the Award is a public document and issuance of Land Loosing Certificate on the basis of such public document and official records is a prevailing system and which is also being followed in this project. 6. That the Land Loser Certificate Contain certain particulars and/or essentials which are as follows: – (i) Name (ii) Father's name and address of the awardee (iii) Land Acquisition Case Number with year (iv) Plot Number with area, share and classification (v) Award No (vi) Status (whether evicted or land loser or structure awardee etc.). 7. That all the aforesaid particulars are also derived from the land acquisition records which have been preserved in the Record Room of the Special Land Acquisition Officer, being respondent No.11 herein. I further say that the Land Acquisition Officer and/or the Special Land, Acquisition Officer is the competent authority for, acquisition of land and who can also certify the details of acquired, land of any person, if any. It is necessary to mention that without such certificate of the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the Screening Committee will be in dark about the acquired land details of any person. 8. That the Labour Department, Government of West Bengal vide its Circular No. 323-EMP/EMP-6PM/86 dated 12th May, 1986 constituted a Screening Committee for sponsoring the names of persons affected by acquisition of land for development project at, Haldia for employment to the authorities concerned. The working of the above Screening Committee is strictly guided by the following two Government orders being Memo No. 5120 (60) LW dated October 17, 1977 and Memo No. 1744-EMP dated August 13, 1979. Photo copies of the Circular No. 323-EMP/EMP-6PM/86, dated 12.05.1986 and Memo No. 5120 (60) LW dated 17.10.1977 and Memo No. 1744-EMP dated 13.8.1977 are annexed hereto and collectively marked with Letter A. 9. That after the Constitution of the Screening Committee the member convenor & the Employment Officer-in-Charge, Project Employment Exchange, Haldia invited for application in specified proforma from the persons affected by acquisition of land between 1986-1998 till date around 5000 applicants whose lands were acquired by Calcutta Port Trust have applied before the Screening Committee for employment. It is worthy to state here that the candidates have to apply in specified proforma along with the following two enclosures: – (i) Land Losers Certificate. (ii) Employment status certificate from local Prodhan/Councilor. 10. It is worthy to state here that the candidates have to apply in specified proforma along with the following two enclosures: – (i) Land Losers Certificate. (ii) Employment status certificate from local Prodhan/Councilor. 10. That thereafter, two Screening Committee scrutinizes the applications received against the following guidelines which are mentioned in the above referred Government Circulars only the applicants who meets the guidelines as set out in the abovementioned Government Circulars are empanelled and sponsored for employment to Calcutta Port Trust. 11. That at the time of preparation of list of empanel the following guidelines are followed by the Screening Committee: – (i) A combined list in order of priority is prepared. (ii) Candidates should hail from families who might have been uprooted from their places of residence. (iii) Only one member from an uprooted family shall be eligible for special preference for job. (iv) The beneficiary should be either an awardee of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act or a nominee or an heir of such a person. (v) If a member of a family is already in the employment under the State or the Central Government or a Company in either private or public sector, no member of the family will be considered for employment. (Definition of family as in W.B.L.R. Act). (vi) Candidate must be a resident of the area bounded by the River Hooghly, the River Haldia and the Hijli Tidal Canal. (vii) In the priority list the order of priority will be determined by the date of acquisition in chronological order. (viii) Lastly, the priority list also contains the quantum of agricultural or homestead land acquired and the quantum of land presently owned by the family, the employment status of the members of the family. (ix) The Employment Officer-in-Charge of Project Employment Exchange, Haldia will sponsor names from the lists against vacancies notified by the employment authority concerned on a basis of priority. 12. That from the Land Losers Certificate the following details about the candidate is obtained: – (i) Whether the family is uprooted from the place of residence. (ii) Whether the beneficiary is an awardee of compensation or a nominee or an heir of such person. (iii) Quantum of land acquired. I further state that mere submission of Land Losers Certificate does not entail any candidate for sponsoring for employment. (ii) Whether the beneficiary is an awardee of compensation or a nominee or an heir of such person. (iii) Quantum of land acquired. I further state that mere submission of Land Losers Certificate does not entail any candidate for sponsoring for employment. The Land Losers Certificate is required for ascertaining the candidates' eligibility against the guidelines of the Government. 13. That the cases of 10 writ petitioners were thoroughly checked up by the Employment Officer of Project Employment Exchange, Haldia and from the available records the reasons for rejection of their cases for employment is noted below: – Reasons for rejection of the cases of writ petitioners. Writ Petitioner No.1 Only the structure of the applicant was acquired but the home stead/bastu has not been acquired. Hence according to the guidelines he has not been uprooted from his place of residence. Writ Petitioner No.2 (i) The candidate has not applied before the Screening Committee. (ii) Secondly, the candidate has enclosed the Land Losers Certificate of Tapadhan Hutait, S/o Panohanan in the writ petition. After the verification of record it is found that the writ petitioner is not a member of the family of the awardee as per the definition of family in West Bengal Land Reforms Act. Writ Petitioner No.3 The application of the candidate before the Screening Committee bearing S.L. No. 175 of 1996 was rejected by the Screening Committee since the applicant's father is employed under Calcutta Port Trust. According to the guidelines if a member of a family is already in employment, it will not be considered. Writ Petitioner No.4 (i) The candidate has not yet applied before the Screening Committee. (ii) Secondly, the candidate has enclosed the Land Loser's Certificate of the Awardee Amulya Charan Samanta. After verification of records it is found that the writ petitioner is not a member of the family of the awardee as per the definition of family in W.B.L.R. Act. Writ Petitioner No.5 (i) The candidate has not applied before the Screening Committee. (ii) Since the copy of the Land Loser's Certificate was not annexed to the writ petition, the case of the writ petitioner could not be traced out and/or verified. Writ Petitioner No.6 The case of the petitioner was not recommended by the Screening Committee as his father Sasadhar Prodhan is employed under Calcutta Port Trust. (ii) Since the copy of the Land Loser's Certificate was not annexed to the writ petition, the case of the writ petitioner could not be traced out and/or verified. Writ Petitioner No.6 The case of the petitioner was not recommended by the Screening Committee as his father Sasadhar Prodhan is employed under Calcutta Port Trust. According to the guidelines if a member of a family is already in employment, the case will not be considered. Writ Petitioner No.7 With reference to the candidates application before the Screening Committee bearing No. 120 of 1996, I state that in compliance of the order of the Hon'ble High Court, Calcutta in W.P. No. 20727 (W) of 1997 one Sri Sarbeswar Maity had applied before the Screening Committee on the basis of same Land Loser's Certificate of Manmatha Nath Maity, S/o Srinivas and the Screening Committee rejected the application of Sarbeswar Maity as one brother of Sri Sarbeswar Maity has already been recommended by the Screening Committee for employment on the basis of same Land Loser's Certificate of Manmatha Nath Maity, S/o Srinivas bearing L.A. Case No. 36 of 1965-66 in Mouza Hatiberia. In view of the above the petitioner's case was not recommended by the Screening Committee. Writ Petitioner No.8 In compliance of the order of the Hon'ble High Court in C.O. No. 3504 (W) of 1990, the case of the petitioner has already been recommended by the Screening Committee but as only 2¾ Decimiles of land has been acquired it is at the bottom in order of priority. Writ Petitioner No.9 In compliance of the order of the Hon'ble High Court in C.O. No. 4386 (W) of 1990, the case of the petitioner was reviewed by the Screening Committee and rejected as his brother Dipak has already been recommended on the basis of same Land Loser's Certificate. Writ Petitioner No.10 The candidate has not even applied before the Screening Committee and no other details regarding the petitioner is traceable. 14. That I have taken necessary steps for searching the Government Circular and/or Government Order, if any, regarding issuance of Land Loser's Certificate by the respective Land Acquisition Officer or Special Land Acquisition Officer so as to on what authority the Land Loser's Certificates are being issued by them. 14. That I have taken necessary steps for searching the Government Circular and/or Government Order, if any, regarding issuance of Land Loser's Certificate by the respective Land Acquisition Officer or Special Land Acquisition Officer so as to on what authority the Land Loser's Certificates are being issued by them. All available records, documents, Government Orders and Circulars were searched out in the Special Land Acquisition Officer at Haldia and in the District Land and Land Reforms Office at Midnapore but nothing was found to that effect. I further say that necessary steps have also been taken for searching the same from the Department of Land & Land Reforms, Government of West Bengal, Writers Building, Calcutta but till today no such Government Order and/or Circular has been found." 12. The writ petitioners then filed an affidavit and stated as follows: – "8. With reference to Paragraph 13 of the said affidavit I deny and dispute that the cases of 10 writ petitioners were thoroughly checked up by the Employment Officer of Project Employment Exchanges, Haldia, I state that the reasons as shown by the deponent of the said affidavit for rejection of the cases of writ petitioners are wrong, baseless and stand upon a lot of wrong & motivated statements. (a) So far as Sk. Khadem, the writ petitioner No.1 is concerned I categorically deny and dispute the statements made therein. I state that not only the structure of his father Sk. Ader & Adem, S/o Sk. Amir was acquired under L.A. Case No.14 of 1966-67 comprising in plot No. 901, Mouza Chiranjibpur J.L. No. 158 under Sutahata Police Station and award was granted to him under S.L. No. 405 but also the lands including homestead land and dwelling house of his father were acquired by the competent authority under L.A. Case No. 69 of 1964-65 comprising in plot No. 651/1505 of Mouza-Dakshin Ranichak, J.L. No. 187 under Sutahata Police Station and respective Awards were granted being S.L. Nos. 138 and 668 which would be evident from the Land Loser's Certificates issued by the Competent Authority in favour of the father of the writ petitioner No.1. This fact clearly shows that the respondent authority concerned without discharging their statutory duties and without applying their mind in the matter, have made such false statements for which the writ petitioner No.1 has already suffered a lot. This fact clearly shows that the respondent authority concerned without discharging their statutory duties and without applying their mind in the matter, have made such false statements for which the writ petitioner No.1 has already suffered a lot. Xerox copy of such Land Loser's Certificates already annexed in the writ petition are further annexed hereto and marked with Letter A/1 & A/2. Because of such acquisition of lands admittedly, the writ petitioner No.1 including his entire family had been uprooted from their entire lands including homestead land whereupon their dwelling house was situated. (b) With reference to the statements made in the said affidavit in respect of Babulal Hutait, the writ petitioner No.2, I state that there is no provision in the Government Circulars published from time to time in this behalf that the member of the land loser's family has to apply before the Screening Committee though the petitioner made a number of representations before the authorities concerned for giving employment to the writ petitioner No.2 inasmuch as while the authorities of the Screening Committee supplied the prescribed forms for employment assistance to many others, the writ petitioners including the writ petitioner No.2 were not given such application forms and therefore such plea of making application does not sustain in anyway whatsoever. It is further stated that petitioner No.2 is the grandson of Tapadhan Hutait whose lands were acquired and in that view of the matter there is no slightest doubt that the writ petitioner No.2 is a bona fide member of the family of Tapadhan Hutait, the awardee of the lands in question and therefore, the statements made by the deponent is wholly wrong illegal and baseless which do not sustain in law. (c) The statements made in respect of Subas Ranjan Das, the writ petitioner No.3 is also wrong and illegal and outcome of clear non-application of mind since the writ petitioner No.3 moved this writ petition upon nomination as nominated by Sri Sirish Chandra Das, the grandfather of the writ petitioner No.3 who was the awardee of his lands and who has been maintaining his grandson, the writ petitioner No.3. It is worthy to mention here that the writ petitioner No.3 moved this writ petition enclosing the relevant land evicted certificate of Sirish Chandra Das so the question of employment of his father is irrelevant inasmuch as his father's appointment was not at all a compassionate one. Xerox copy of an affidavit of Sri Sirish Chandra Das nominating the writ petitioner No.3 as his bona fide nominee is annexed herewith and marked with Letter B. (d) With reference to the statements made in the said affidavit in respect of writ petitioner No.4, the instant deponent, is also wrong and baseless. Provision does not provide the writ petitioner No.4 to make an application before the Screening Committee until and unless he is asked for, though the said writ petitioner and the members of his family made a number of representations before the authority concerned to give employment to the writ petitioner No.4 on the ground that his family was dislodged from their respective lands for the construction and development of Haldia Project. Sri Amulya Samanta was an awardee of the lands of his family inasmuch as Sri Amulya Samanta, the grandfather of the writ petitioner No.4 was the head of the family and therefore, there cannot be any question that the writ petitioner No.4 is not the member of the family of Sri Amulya Samanta, the awardee of the lands in question. (e) The statements made by the deponent in the said affidavit in respect of Saktipada Dinda, the writ petitioner No.5 do not sustain in law. There is no provision in law of making such application as alleged until and unless the writ petitioner No.2 is asked to apply and until and unless he is given by the Screening Committee, the prescribed application form for employment assistance though the writ petitioner No.5 made a number of representations before the competent authorities for compassionate appointment. It is funny to note that since the writ petitioner No.5 could not annex the Land Loser's Certificate to the instant writ petition, the case of the writ petitioner No.5 could not be tressed out and/or verified though the respondents concerned are admittedly, the custodians of all the documents of those who lost their lands for the cause of Haldia Dock Complex. Xerox copy of the said Land Loser's Certificate is annexed hereto and marked with the Letter C. (f) Statements made by the deponent in respect of Dibyendu Prodhan, the writ petitioner No.6 are wrong and the result of non-application of mind. It is untrue that Sri Sasadhar Prodhan, the father of the writ petitioner No.6 is employed under Calcutta Port Trust. (g) The statements made by the deponent in respect of Tapan Kumar Maity, the writ petitioner No.7 are completely baseless. Such statements were made in order to frustrate the claim of the writ petitioner No.7. Sri Manmatha Nath Maity is the father of Netai Ch. Maity and Gourhari Maity. After the death of Manmatha his lands were inherited by his sons, Netai and Gour. Since the case of Baneswar was recommended being the son of Netai and grandson of Manmatha, the case of Tapan Kumar Maity son of Gour and grandson of Manmatha ought to be recommended and he is fully entitled to a job. The case of Sarbeswar Maity may be rejected on the ground that his elder brother Baneswar's case was recommended but on that plea the case of Tapan Kumar Maity cannot at all be rejected. (h) With reference to the statements made in the said paragraph in respect of Gopal Chandra Acharya, the writ petitioner No.8, it is stated that in the instant writ petition prayer was made for commanding the respondents authorities concerned to give appointment to the petitioner at Haldia Dock Complex according to the qualification and/or eligibility of the petitioner. Since the case of the instant writ petitioner was not considered by the Port Authority rather they had been attempting to fill up the existing vacancies of Groups C and D categories of post by absorbing the outsiders and/or their favoured persons leaving aside the case of this petitioner the instant petitioner had to move this petition for a mandatory direction upon the Haldia Dock Complex to give appointment to him along with others according to his suitability. (i) The statements made in the said paragraph in respect of Dwijen Das, the petitioner No.9, are result of complete non-application of mind. (i) The statements made in the said paragraph in respect of Dwijen Das, the petitioner No.9, are result of complete non-application of mind. It will appear from the annexure of the writ petition that the writ petitioner No.9 in the instant case has moved upon the Land Loser's Certificate of Smt. Makhan Bala Das, wife of Late Ashini who is the elder brother of his father. Smt. Makhan Bala Das by an affidavit nominated the writ petitioner No.9 as her nominee and by virtue of such nomination, the instant writ petitioner No.9 has come to this Court for such compassionate appointment in Haldia Dock Complex for whose cause the lands of Makhan Bala Das wife of Late Ashini Das were acquired. Xerox copy of the said affidavit is annexed hereto and marked with Letter D. (j) The statements made in the said paragraph so far as the writ petitioner No.10 is concerned, are not only wrong but also ridiculous. It is submitted that there is no provision of making such application as alleged though the writ petitioner No.10 made a number of representations before the authority concerned. It is surprising that the respondents authorities concerned being the custodian of all the documents so far as the acquisition of lands are concerned have made very irresponsible and reckless statements inasmuch as it will be evident from the writ petition that instant writ petitioner has annexed two bona fide Land Loser Certificates whereby the respondents authorities without making such irresponsible statements could take appropriate steps in the matter of recommending the case of the writ petitioner No.10 when admittedly, the writ petitioner No.10 himself and his father were the awardees of their lands in question. I categorically state that the entire screening as it appears on the face of the records is wrong, illegal, mala fide and motivated and/or complete outcome of non-application of mind." 13. With that affidavit once again the writ petitioners annexed a copy of the Land Loser Certificate issued in favour of Sk. Ader, son of Sk. Amir in respect of acquisition of structure and also copy of a Land Loser Certificate issued in favour of Sk. Adem, son of Sk. Amir in respect of acquisition of bastu land. In addition to that copy of an affidavit of Sri Sirish Chandra Das was annexed. Ader, son of Sk. Amir in respect of acquisition of structure and also copy of a Land Loser Certificate issued in favour of Sk. Adem, son of Sk. Amir in respect of acquisition of bastu land. In addition to that copy of an affidavit of Sri Sirish Chandra Das was annexed. In that he has stated that he is too old and has been maintained by his grandson, Sri Subas Ranjan Das and he intend to handover his Land Loser Certificate with all rights, titles and interests therein to Sri Subas Ranjan Das. In that affidavit it has been stated that Sri Subas Ranjan Das may be considered for appointment on the strength of that Certificate as none of his family member has got any employment on the basis of such Certificates. The next document annexed is a copy of Land Loser Certificate issued in favour of Gunadhar Dinda in respect of acquisition of 69 acre of land. The last document is again an affidavit of Smt. Makhan Bala Das where she has stated that she is an aged person and that her son is unable to obtain any sort of employment due to over age. It has further been stated that her nephew Sri Dwijen Das is looking after herself and thus she will have no objection if Sri Dwijen Das gds an employment on the Land Loser Certificate issued in her favour. 14. The word family has not been defined in Section 2 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. Chapter IIB of the said Act, shall have effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the said Act or in any other law in force or any custom, usage or contract or any agreement, decree, order, decision or award of any Court, tribunal or authority, except to vacant land in an urban agglomeration as defined in the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, imposing ceiling on holding. Section 14K contained in the said Chapter defines family as follows: – "S. 14K (c) Family in relation to a raiyat shall be deemed to consists of: – (i) Himself and his wife, minor sons, unmarried daughters, if any. (ii) His unmarried adult son, if any, who does not hold any land as a raiyat. Section 14K contained in the said Chapter defines family as follows: – "S. 14K (c) Family in relation to a raiyat shall be deemed to consists of: – (i) Himself and his wife, minor sons, unmarried daughters, if any. (ii) His unmarried adult son, if any, who does not hold any land as a raiyat. (iii) His married adult son, if any, where neither such adult son nor the wife nor any minor son or unmarried daughter of such adult son holds any land as a raiyat. (iv) Widow of his predeceased son, if any, where neither such widow nor any minor son or unmarried daughter of such widow holds any land as a raiyat. (v) Minor son or unmarried daughter, if any, of his predeceased son, where the widow of such predeceased son is dead and any minor son or unmarried daughter of such predeceased son does not hold any land as raiyat. But shall not include any other person." 15. It appears that in addition to the writ petitions mentioned in the subsequent affidavit filed by the Additional District Magistrate, Haldia, another writ petition, being C.O. No. 15240 (W) of 1996 was flied. No reference has been made to the said writ petition in the body of the instant petition. Writ Petition No. C.O. 15240 (W) of 1996 was filed with an object to canvas the cases of Arup Kumar Pattanayak, Mukunda Charan Maity, Ajoy Samanta, Tapas Hutait, Uttam Kumar Panja, Subliasis Bera, Lokesh Maity, Sk. Khadem, Bibhash Manna, Matilal Dinda, Narayan Chandra Manna, Nimai Chandra Mondal, Asok Kumar Bera, Tapan Maity, Bhagirath Parui and Gurupada Maity. Mukunda Charan Maity claimed employment for his father Gourhari Maity having lost the land at Hatiberia in Mouza No. 167 as has been claimed by Tapan Kumar Maity in the instant case. Sk. Khadem claimed in that writ petition for his father Sk. Adem having been evicted whereas in the instant writ petition his original claim is based on his father Sk. Ader having been evicted. Sk. Khadem claimed in that writ petition for his father Sk. Adem having been evicted whereas in the instant writ petition his original claim is based on his father Sk. Ader having been evicted. That writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 11th October, 1996 by directing the petitioners to make a representation to the Screening Committee set up by the State of West Bengal within two weeks from date with a further direction upon the Screening Committee to ascertain whether the petitioners' land have been acquired for the purpose of Haldia Dock Complex and to ascertain whether any other member of the petitioners family had obtained appointment under the scheme framed by the authority concerned. The Screening Committee was also directed to forward the name of the petitioners to the Employment Exchange upon intimation to the Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta if it is satisfied as to the petitioners' eligibility for being provided relief under the scheme in question. It does not appear as to whether Sk. Adem did make a representation to the Screening Committee in terms of the said order. It is also not known whether Mukunda Charan Maity, who was the petitioner No.2 in the said writ petition being C.O. No. 15240 (W) of 1996 in terms of the said order made a representation and whether his name has been screened in terms of the said order. 16. Five principal questions emerged from what have been stated above. They are: – (i) Is it mandatory for the land loser to apply for being screened. (ii) If they are required to make such application what particulars they are required to furnish in such applications. (iii) Is it necessary that a Land Loser Certificate must accompanying such applications. (iv) What is the evidentiary value of a Land Loser Certificate. (v) What is the obligation of the Employment Authority vis-a-vis, the successfully screened land loser? 17. By the notification dated 17th October, 1977, State Government directed that all vacancies arising in the State Government Establishments, State Government Undertakings, Quasi-Government Establishments and Local Bodies, where recruitments are not made through Public Service Commission or by way of normal absorption of personnel declared surplus by that Government, as a Rule be filled up through the Employment Exchange (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act, 1950. By that notification, however, an exception was made in regard to giving of such appointment, to, inter alia, the candidates hailing from families who might have been uprooted from their place of residence as a result of the land in question being acquired by the Government for development projects like setting up a power plant or a township etc. as at Haldia. It made clear that only one member from an uprooted family shall be eligible for such special concession for jobs in and around the area acquired. Therefore, the mandate was employment through Employment Exchange except candidate hailing from families of land losers. That exception is applicable only to one member of the family of such land loser. Although by that Circular, reservation was made in favour of ex-servicemen but no reservation was made in regard to the candidates hailing from the families of land losers. The Circular, therefore, merely authorized the Employment Authorities to recruit a member of a family of land loser without referring the matter to the Employment Exchange provided the land acquired is in and around the place of employment but did not compel the Employment Authorities to do so. 18. By the corrigendum dated 13th August, 1979 certain conditions were imposed to identify such land losers. It provided that as a result of the land being acquired by the Government, the families of land losers might have been uprooted from their places of residence or whose main source of income have been affected due to loss of agricultural land. The said corrigendum, therefore, did not create any new right in favour of any land loser but on the contrary restricted the meaning of the term land loser. 19. By that the notification dated 12th May, 1986, the Government provided that the candidates from families who have been uprooted from their places of residence or whose main source of income from agriculture has been affected on account of acquisition of land in question for the purpose of any development project should be empanelled any sponsored for employment to the Employment Authorities concerned by the Employment Officer of Project Employment Exchange (P.E.E.), Haldia on the basis of recommendation of a Screening Officer. The said notification constituted a Screening Committee and directed the Screening Committee to prepare (i) a combined list in order of priority for families affected by acquisition of land for the Haldia Dock Complex, the Refinery of Indian Oil Corporation and the Fertilizer Plant of Hindusthan Fertilizer Corporation and (ii) a separate list for the other major projects located at Haldia other than those mentioned above. It further provided that one member of a family will be eligible for appointment and that the beneficiary should be either an awardee of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act or an heir of such a person. It then stated that if a member of a family is already in the employment under the State or the Central Government or a company either in private or public sector, no member of the family will be considered for appointment. It then stated that the candidates must be resident of the area bounded by the River Hooghly, the River Haldia and the Hijli Tidal Canal. It stated that the definition of family for the purpose of that Circular will be the same as in the West Bengal Land Reforms Act. It further provided that the order of priority in the list will be determined by the date of acquisition in chronological order and if lands have been acquired at the same time the priority should be fixed on the basis as follows: – (i) Whose homestead have been acquired provided he was landless agricultural labourer or bargadar or marginal and small farmer or non-agricultural labourer. (ii) Bargadars, Marginal farmers and Small farmers. (iii) Physically handicapped persons. (iv) Persons belonging to the Schedule Castes and Tribes. (v) Other persons. 20. It further provided that the priority on above would be fixed provided the main source of income of such person has been affected by acquisition of the agricultural land in question. It then provided that the priority list should contain the names of the persons seeking employment, the quantum of agricultural or homestead land acquired and the quantum of land presently owned by the family as well as the employment status of the members of the family. It then stated that the Employment Officer-in-Charge of Project Employment Exchange, Haldia will sponsor name from the lists against vacancies notified by the Employment Authority concerned on the basis of priority. It then stated that the Employment Officer-in-Charge of Project Employment Exchange, Haldia will sponsor name from the lists against vacancies notified by the Employment Authority concerned on the basis of priority. The said Circular therefore, took away the authority granted to the Employment Authorities at Haldia, who have established their establishments on the acquired land, to recruit a member of a family of a land loser without referring the matter to the Employment Exchange and on the other hand it imposed an obligation upon such Employment Authorities to approach Employment Exchange for recruitment to all their vacancies. The Employment Exchange was asked to sponsor candidates to the Employment Authorities upon such candidates being empanelled in order of priority by the Screening Committee. It provided that such candidates must be resident of the area bounded by the River Hooghly, the River Haldia and the Hijli Tidal Canal and they must be either an awardee of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act or an heir of such person but if a member of such a family, within the meaning of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, is in employment, he shall not be empanelled. The priority shall be determined by the date of acquisition in chronological order but if acquisitions were made more or less at the same time, the priority should be fixed in between them on the basis mentioned above. The empanelment would be made in two lists (i) containing the families affected by acquisition of land for the Haldia Dock Complex, the Refinery of Indian Oil Corporation and the Fertilizer Plant of Hindusthan Fertilizer Corporation and (ii) containing the families affected by acquisition of land for other major projects other than Haldia Dock Complex, the Refinery of Indian Oil Corporation and the Fertilizer Plant of Hindusthan Fertilizer Corporation. The object of keeping two separate lists was to sponsor those from the first list to the vacancies arising at Haldia Dock Complex, the Refinery of Indian Oil Corporation and the Fertilizer Plant of Hindusthan Fertilizer Corporation and persons in the other list to the vacancies arising in other major projects. The object of keeping two separate lists was to sponsor those from the first list to the vacancies arising at Haldia Dock Complex, the Refinery of Indian Oil Corporation and the Fertilizer Plant of Hindusthan Fertilizer Corporation and persons in the other list to the vacancies arising in other major projects. Although this Circular did not require any application to be made by the land loser but it having directed that the names would be sponsored by the Employment Exchange concerned, if made it obligatory on the part of the each aspirant candidate to have him or her registered with the concerned Employment Exchange. Unless he or she furnishes necessary particulars to the Employment Exchange, the Employment Exchange would not know whether he or she should be empanelled in the said lists and therefore, it would be his or her responsibility to inform the Employment Exchange accordingly. Such particulars can be furnished in the form of an application or otherwise. 21. The notification dated 12th May, 1986 requires the land losers to be empanelled with the Employment Exchange so that they may be sponsored. Therefore, the first and foremost thing that is required to be done is to get registered with the Employment Exchange and if the candidate is already registered to furnish the particulars of registration and other necessary particulars to the Employment Exchange. The said notification has cast an obligation upon the Screening Committee to prepare two separate lists. In order to facilitate preparation of such lists it would be a necessity for the land losers to give full particulars of the acquired lands belonging to them or to their family. In order to expedite verification of the particulars of the lands acquired, it would be necessary not only to give full particular of the lands acquired, i.e., the area, location etc. but also to state the name of the person whose lands were acquired and who received compensation for such acquisition. The said notification further provides that the priority in the list should be determined on the basis of the date of acquisition in chronological order. Therefore, it would be a necessity to furnish the date of acquisition in order to get priority in the list. The said notification further provides that the priority in the list should be determined on the basis of the date of acquisition in chronological order. Therefore, it would be a necessity to furnish the date of acquisition in order to get priority in the list. Since larger tract of lands were acquired at a time, which belonged to several persons, notification provides that inter se seniority amongst them would be determined in the manner as has been indicated above. Therefore, it would be a necessity to inform as to whether the land loser in question, i.e., the person, whose land was acquired, was an agricultural labourer a bargadar, a marginal or small farmer, non-agricultural labourer, physically handicapped persons, persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Tribes, etc. and whether the land acquired was a homestead, or an agricultural or other land. The said notification further provides that mere acquisition of land would not entitle inclusion of a land loser in the list to be prepared by the Screening Committee. It says that the main source of income of such land loser must have been affected by acquisition of the agricultural land so acquired. Therefore, it would be a necessity to furnish particulars of other lands which had not been acquired but belong to the person whose land was acquired or the person who received the compensation. This is a must inasmuch as if by reason of acquisition of agricultural land the main source or income has not been affected the land loser or the family of the land loser in question would not come within the purview of the said notification. The highlight being on the word main source of income of the main source of income of such land loser was not from the acquired agricultural land, such land loser would also not come within the purview of the said notification. Similarly, in case of acquisition of homestead, the status of the land loser would entail priority. Therefore, it would be necessary to state the status, in case of acquisition of homestead, and in other cases the other source of income of such land losers. The notification does not say that priority would be determined on the basis of the quantum of land acquired, but it is an obligation to furnish such particulars in the list and accordingly, the particulars regarding quantum of land acquired must be furnished. The notification does not say that priority would be determined on the basis of the quantum of land acquired, but it is an obligation to furnish such particulars in the list and accordingly, the particulars regarding quantum of land acquired must be furnished. The quantum of acquisition, however, would not entail any priority in the list. The said notification provides that an aspirant for employment must be resident of the area bounded by the River Hooghly, the River Haldia and the Hijli Tidal Canal. Therefore, full particulars of the residence of the candidate applying must be indicated. The notification then provides that only one member of a family of the land loser will be eligible for appointment. It further provides that the beneficiary should be an awardee of compensation or an heir of such a person. It further provides that if a member of the family is already in the employment, no member of the family will be considered for employment and such family shall be as defined in the West Bengal Land Reforms Act. Therefore, it would be a necessity to furnish name of the awardee of compensation, whether he is the candidate for employment or not, name of his wife, sons., unmarried daughters, widow of his predeceased son and unmarried daughters of his predeceased son with a declaration that none of them was or is in employment either in public sector or in private sector from the date of the said notification, i.e. 12th May, 1986 until the date of furnishing such particulars. Since no minor is entitled to an employment, a son of a predeceased son of a land loser will not come within the purview of family. 22. I, therefore, think that the candidate seeking to be treated in the land loser category in terms of the aforementioned notifications must furnish the following particulars to the Project Employment Exchange, Haldia, either at the time of registering himself with the said Employment Exchange or if he is so registered, but not as a land loser: – (i) Name. (ii) Particulars of Employment Exchange Registration. (iii) Father's name. (iv) Age. (v) Educational Qualifications. (vi) Residential Address. (vii) Particulars of land acquired, (giving exact location of the land, area and nature) (viii) Date of Acquisition. (ix) Name of the awardee of compensation. (ii) Particulars of Employment Exchange Registration. (iii) Father's name. (iv) Age. (v) Educational Qualifications. (vi) Residential Address. (vii) Particulars of land acquired, (giving exact location of the land, area and nature) (viii) Date of Acquisition. (ix) Name of the awardee of compensation. (x) Status of awardee of compensation at the time of acquisition, (whether landless agricultural labourer or bargadar or marginal or small farmer or non-agricultural labourers in case the homestead has been acquired and in other cases whether the land loser was a bargadar, marginal farmer, small farmer or physically handicapped or belonging to Scheduled Caste or Tribe) (xi) Name of the wife of the awardee of compensation. (xii) Name (s) of the son (s) of the awardee of compensation. (xiii) Name (s) of the unmarried daughter (s) of the awardee of compensation. (xiv) Name (s) of the widow (s) of predeceased son (s) of the awardee of compensation. (xv) Name (s) of the unmarried daughter (s) of predeceased son (s) of the awardee of compensation. (xvi) Employment status of the persons named against item no. X to XV. (xvii) Full particulars of lands belonging to the above named awardee of compensation, which have not been acquired, (giving location, area and nature) (xviii) Whether the awardee of compensation at the time of acquisition of the land in question had any other source of income. (xix) Relationship between the candidate and the awardee of compensation. (xx) Any other information. 23. As would be evidenced from the facts stated above the candidates seeking to be treated in the category of land losers as well as the authorities concerned have proceeded on the basis as if the Land Losers'. Certificates obtained by them are evidence of a right to properties get appointments and the same are transferable in favour of persons who are not members of the family within the meaning of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, although it is clear from the Circular dated 12th May, 1986 that an awardee of compensation can nominate his heir provided such heir is a member of the family in terms of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act and not to others. The grandson is not such an heir, who can be nominated, but he is being nominated. The grandson is not such an heir, who can be nominated, but he is being nominated. It is being claimed that son is either overaged or incapable to work and that is why grandson is being nominated, but then that is not permissible. The uncle or aunty is nominating nephew or niece, although they are not members of the same family. Though the father is employed, the grandfather is nominating the grandson on the claim that the grandson looks after him and that in respect of the Land Loser's Certificate no employment has been granted and thus seeking to treat such certificate as a property to get employment. These claims are all misplaced. 24. It is an admitted position that Land Loser's Certificates are being issued without there being any statutory law or administrative order authorizing such issue. It has been claimed that those Land Losers' Certificates are being issued on the basis of information derived from various records, one of which, namely, the compensation award, is a public document. Under Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 every Public Officer having the custody of a public document, which any person has a right to inspect, shall give that person on demand a copy of it on payment of the legal fees therefore together with certificate written at the foot of such copy that it is a true copy of such document or part thereof, as the case may be, and such certificate shall be dated, and subscribed by such Officer with his name and his official title, and shall be sealed, whenever such. Officer is authorized by law to make use of a seal; and such copies so certified shall be called certified copies. Under Section 77 of the said Act such certified copies may be produced in proof of the contents of the public documents or parts of the public documents of which they purport to be •copies. The Evidence Act does not permit extracts of a public document to be certified. Therefore, even if the Land Losers' Certificates are true and correct extract of the award it has no evidentiary value. If Land Losers' Certificates are being issued from the compensation awards, then there is no reason why the certified copies thereof cannot be granted and instead Land Losers' Certificates are being granted. Therefore, even if the Land Losers' Certificates are true and correct extract of the award it has no evidentiary value. If Land Losers' Certificates are being issued from the compensation awards, then there is no reason why the certified copies thereof cannot be granted and instead Land Losers' Certificates are being granted. If a Public Officer furnishes Land Losers' Certificates, as has been done in the instant case, the same should be treated only as a personal information furnished by such Officer to the person to whom such certificate has been issued and such certificate shall have no other legal value at all. It would not, therefore, be necessary to furnish any such certificate by any Public Officer to an awardee of compensation or his heir except by way of a personal information to such awardee of compensation or his heir. An awardee of compensation or his heir similarly cannot found his claim to be treated in the land losers' category on the basis of such certificate. He can, however, found his such claim on the basis of the award of compensation or on the basis of a certified copy thereof, which may be granted by the concerned authority, i.e., the person in whose custody the same is lying. Therefore, it would not be necessary for a person to furnish a Land Losers' Certificate at the time he could be furnishing the above particulars to the concerned Employment Exchange. He may, however, to strengthen his case furnish a copy or a certified copy of the award of compensation. Inasmuch as no certified copy can be issued in respect of a document, which is not a public document, any authority supplying any information from a document or a Register or any other paper, which is not a public document, in the form of a certificate to anyone would have no value at all. Therefore, any such certificate is of no value and as a consequence there is no necessity of furnishing any such certificate by a candidate while furnishing the above particulars to the concerned Employment Exchange Authority. The General Clauses Act and for that matter no other statutory law authorizes any of the respondents to give an extract to any person from a document or a Register or a paper in his custody. 25. The General Clauses Act and for that matter no other statutory law authorizes any of the respondents to give an extract to any person from a document or a Register or a paper in his custody. 25. The information, as noted above, are necessary for consideration by the Screening Committee for the purpose of empanelling the candidates in the concerned list. The Additional District Magistrate is the Chairman of the Screening Committee. He has stated in the affidavits filed by him in this proceedings that the records pertaining to land acquisition matters are preserved in the Record Room under the custody of the Special Land Acquisition Oi1icer and the Land Losers' Certificates are being issued on the basis of and upon consultation of those records. If that be so, then even without a Land Losers' Certificate it would not at all be difficult for the Screening Committee to cross check the claims made in the particulars submitted by a candidate in respect of acquisition of land on which special concession is being claimed by the candidate. 26. Instead of Land Losers' Certificate, therefore, I would appreciate if while furnishing the above particulars a candidate furnishes certificates as to his place of residence, status of the awardee of compensation at the time of acquisition, employment status of the awardee of compensation and his heirs mentioned above, main source of income of the awardee of compensation at the time of acquisition etc. from a competent authority. 27. As soon as such information and particulars are furnished it would be the obligation of the Project Employment Exchange, Haldia, to furnish the same to the Screening Committee. As has been observed by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned judgment it would be the obligation of the Screening Committee to verify the truth and substance of the claims made by a candidate in such particulars. As has been observed by the Supreme Court in the aforementioned judgment it would be the obligation of the Screening Committee to verify the truth and substance of the claims made by a candidate in such particulars. If the Screening Committee finds that the candidate is not a resident of the area bounded by the River Hooghly, the River Haldia and the Hijli Tidal Canal or if he is neither the awardee of compensation, nor wife or son or unmarried daughter or widow of a predeceased son of the awardee of compensation or an unmarried daughter of a predeceased son of the awardee of compensation or if the awardee of compensation or wife or a son or an unmarried daughter of the awardee of compensation or a widow of the predeceased son of the awardee of compensation or an unmarried daughter of a predeceased son of the awardee of compensation, is in employment either in public sector or in private sector or if the main source of income of the awardee of the compensation has not been affected by acquisition of the agricultural land, but not homestead land, it shall, immediately instruct the Project Employment Exchange, Haldia that such a candidate is not entitled to be treated in the land loser's category indicating the reasons therefore and the Project Employment Exchange, Haldia in turn should inform the candidate that he cannot be treated in the category of land loser and accordingly cannot be empanelled in any of the lists mentioned in the Memorandum dated 12th May, 1986 disclosing the reason therefore. In all other cases, the Screening Committee will empanel the candidates in the order of priority to be determined solely on the ground of acquisition in chronological order. The priority will not be lost because of largeness and smallness of the quantum of acquisition. . If acquisition was made at the same time, priority shall be fixed, in case homestead had been acquired by considering the status of the awardee of compensation at the time of acquisition and landless agricultural labourer would get the first priority, then Bargadar, thereafter marginal and small farmers and lastly non-agricultural labourer and in other cases, first Bargadar, small farmers, marginal and second, physically handicapped persons, third, persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and then all other persons. If the homestead had been acquired of a person who was not a landless agricultural labourer or a Bargadar or a marginal and small farmer or a non-agricultural labourer, he would come in the category of other persons. After empanelling a candidate in the lists along with• other candidates in accordance with priority, the Screening Committee must furnish a copy thereof to the Project Employment Exchange, Haldia, who then shall intimate the empanelled candidates as to what is his position in the lists, Such lists must be transparent and shall be open for inspection by anyone desiring to inspect the same. 28. In terms of the above Circulars, the Employment Authorities who have set up their establishments at Haldia on the acquired lands should request the Project Employment Exchange, Haldia, to sponsor candidates for all vacant posts in such establishments. While so requesting it shall be their obligation to state the minimum desired qualifications of the candidates, desired technical qualifications of the candidates, if any, minimum and maximum age of such candidates, etc. and if they follow any roster whether the post to be filled in, is reserved or not. They must also indicate whether the said posts or any of them is reserved for being filled up by ex-servicemen in accordance with the Ex-servicemen (Reservation and Vacancies in the said Service and Posts, Class-III and Class-IV) Rule, 1975. Upon receipt of such request the Project Employment Exchange, Haldia shall sponsor the names from the appropriate lists to the appropriate appointing authority on priority basis. In respect of one post twenty names should be sponsored. One of them must be a Scheduled Caste. For posts reserved for Scheduled Castes and Tribes, the names of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates alone shall be sponsored. Having regard to the fact that the policy of the Government as depicted in the Memorandum dated 12th May, 1986 provides for giving priority in the lists, in the matter of employment, priority must be given according to the lists. In other words, if for one post, the first man in the lists does not get the job but the 19th or the 20th gets the job, then the object of the policy would be vitiated. The Employment Authority, therefore, must give appropriate and due weightage to the priority of the person as sponsored by the Employment Exchange. In other words, if for one post, the first man in the lists does not get the job but the 19th or the 20th gets the job, then the object of the policy would be vitiated. The Employment Authority, therefore, must give appropriate and due weightage to the priority of the person as sponsored by the Employment Exchange. If the candidates having higher priority do not get selected but a candidate or candidates having lower priority gets or get appointment, it shall be the obligation of the Employment Authority to inform the unsuccessful candidate the reason for his/her unsuccess and such information must also be sent to the Project Employment Exchange, Haldia. Unless the reasons so disclosed, do not show that the unsuccessful candidate is totally unsuitable for the job for which his name was sponsored, such unsuccessful candidate must be sponsored on the next occasion when there would be a vacancy for a similar one. Therefore, it shall be the obligation of the Employment Authority to state in the reasons whether the unsuccessful candidate is altogether unsuitable for the job for which he was sponsored. In respect of any employment until and unless the Project Employment Exchange, Haldia certifies that it has no candidate to be sponsored for the posts notified by the Employment Authority, the Employment Authority shall not be entitled to recruit any employee in its establishments established on the acquired land at Haldia. 29. It appears that the above have not been done and accordingly, the policy of the Government has not been fulfilled and the down trodden but eligible candidates have not been able to take benefit of the said beneficial policy of the Government. I, therefore, direct the Project Employment Exchange, Haldia to vigorously notify within the area bounded by the River Hooghly, the River Haldia and the Hijli Tidal Canal, that candidates aspiring to be considered for employment under the land loser category must apply to it within a period of one month from the date of last of such notifications giving particulars as mentioned above and any other particulars as may be found necessary and thereupon to take steps as have been mentioned above. The last of such notifications must be published within a period of two months from the date hereof. The last of such notifications must be published within a period of two months from the date hereof. It is expected that the final list in accordance with the judgment shall be made, and in doing so the lists, if any already existing should be suitably altered, and a copy thereof must be made available to the Project Employment Exchange, Haldia within a period of six months from the date hereof, who in turn should intimate the candidates as to the results of their applications, so that the aspiring candidates may know their position within a reasonable time. In the event, the Screening Committee decides to alter the lists subsequent to making of the same and furnishing a copy thereof in terms of this order, it shall be obligatory for them to notify the reasons thereof by a public notice at least 21 days before affecting such alteration so as to enable others who may be affected thereby to lodge their appropriate contentions in regard to such proposed alteration. It is made clear that if any such contentions is lodged, the Screening Committee shall not alter the list without disposing of such contentions. The Employment Authorities shall then act in the manner indicated above. Before preparation of the lists in terms of this judgment, the already existing lists must be followed, but only in terms of the observations made above. With those directions the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Later-Let urgent xerox certified copies of this judgment, if applied for, be delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties.