Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 983 (HP)

Meena Devi v. State Of H. P.

2019-07-19

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2019
JUDGMENT : Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. The petition has been filed by the present petitioner seeking relief as under:- "Writ of mandamus may kindly be issued thereby directing the respondents to provide employment under Resettlement and Rehabilitation Plan Scheme (Annexure P-2) to the petitioner who belongs to project affected family of Parbati Hydro Electric Project." 2. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner and respondents No. 3 and 4 have placed on record an attested copy of the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in similar case titled Smt. Kala Devi versus State of H.P. and others CWP No. 2529 of 2012 decided on 31st December, 2012. Facts are similar in both the cases and the relevant para of the order passed in the said case is being reproduced as below:- "It is seen that respondent No.3-Corporation is alive to its commitment of providing employment to one of the eligible members of the families rendered landless on account of acquisition of land for construction of Parbati Hydro Electric Project, in District Kullu. No recruitment in the category of skilled/semi-skilled/unskilled seems to have yet taken place. The respondent-Corporation has undertaken that as and when the recruitment in these categories is made, preference shall be given to the eligible members of such families, rendered landless. The representation submitted by the petitioner to the 2nd respondent is still pending consideration. In such a situation, there is no need to enter into the controversy in this writ petition on merits and this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner and to respondent No. 3 Corporation to consider his claim for providing employment, in accordance with the Scheme, as it is legitimately expected from the said respondent to consider the petitioner for appointment as and when the recruitment is made in the near future. 3. In case, the petition is similarly placed, she shall be entitled to the same relief as granted in the above case. The petition is accordingly disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.