JUDGMENT B.P. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. Petitioners before this court claim to be project affected persons and therefore, seek order to quash communication sent to them rejecting the demand to issue certificate regarding that status. 3. Respective counsel for the petitioners state that the certificate is rejected only on the ground that the norms prescribed by the Government Resolution dated 3.5.2010, are not fulfilled. According to them, the employment is to be provided as a part of scheme which was in force when land was acquired. Thus, right to employment crystallized on the date on which land was acquired is relevant and subsequent change in the scheme thereafter is, therefore, not relevant. They rely upon judgment dated 18th October, 2010 in W.P. No. 6921 of 2010 to substantiate their contention. 4. Learned AGP, for the respondents states that Government Resolution dated 3.5.2010, has been issued to regulate the grant of employment and hence, it is applicable from the date of its issuance. According to him, therefore, if certificate is applied for after 3.5.2010, the Authorities are bound to apply modified norms and hence, the impugned orders can not be interfered with. He submits that in judgment delivered on 18th October, 2010, Division Bench of this court, was not required to look into the said aspect. 5. After hearing respective counsel, we find that the entitlement to employment accrues on the date on which the land is acquired. The employment may be provided lateron, but then, that by itself, will not make the subsequent alterations in norms applicable to adversely affect such entitlement. Had the person permitting his land to be acquired for project been then aware that his entitlement to employment would be removed some time in future because of such alterations, he might have in that situation, opposed the acquisition itself. 6. The situation can also be viewed in the light of law which regulates grant of compassionate employment. Compassionate employment is by way of exception and it is a concession provided to family in distress. If on the date on which the employment is being provided the family is not in distress, the employer is not under obligation to provide it. Hence, the date on which the employment is offered or becomes available is decisive. 7. Compassionate employment is by way of exception and it is a concession provided to family in distress. If on the date on which the employment is being provided the family is not in distress, the employer is not under obligation to provide it. Hence, the date on which the employment is offered or becomes available is decisive. 7. In contradistinction, in present situation, the entitlement accrues on the date of acquisition. Hence, any subsequent change in norms is not relevant. Even the date on which application is made is, therefore, not relevant. The entitlement already accrued is only sought to be enforced later by the person in whose favour it is so accrued. 8. In this situation, we quash and set aside the impugned order. We direct the concerned authorities to reconsider the applications submitted to it by respective petitioners in the light of the judgment dated 18th October, 2010. The said reconsideration shall be completed within a period of 4 months from today. 9. With these observations and directions, writ petitions are partly allowed and disposed of. No costs.