The High Court
Case Details
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 11-Jul-2025 11:48:17 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C). NO.27313 OF 2024 Ashish Kumar Sahoo …. Petitioner Mr. Bibhu Prasad Das, Advocate -versus- Mahanadi Coal Fields Ltd., Sambalpur and others …. Opp. Parties Mr. Siba Narayan Biswal, Additional Standing Counsel (For Opp. Party Nos.3 & 4) CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER 01.07.2025 Order No. 10. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 17th September, 2024 (Annexure-17) passed by the General Manager, Hingula Area, Mahanadi Coal Fields Limited (MCL) in rejecting the representation of the Petitioner, which was entertained pursuant to the direction of this Court in W.P.(C). No.27208 of 2023and to direct the Opposite Parties to issue letter of appointment to the Petitioner under the policy “one job to one family”.
Legal Reasoning
After perusing the impugned order, when we are not Inclined to interfere with the same, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that two decisions of this Court in the cases of Sunil Kumar Dash Vrs. State of Odisha and others (W.P.(C) No.3192 of 2008) and Jayanta Kumar Pradhan Vrs. Mahanadi Coal Field Ltd. and others (W.P.(C) No.8555 of 2016) support the case of the petitioner. Copies of the decisions have been provided to the learned counsel for the State, who seeks some time to go through the same. List this matter on 24.03.2025.” 7. From the averments made in the Writ Petition and the documents annexed as well as submission made by learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court finds that name of Basanta Sahoo, father of the Petitioner was in the list of nominees, but, he did not avail the employment as he was employed in NALCO. Dibakar Sahoo, the son in law of Kathi Sahoo whose name did not appear in the list of nominees, was given employment in MCL for acquisition of land of Kathi Sahoo, the land oustee. In some documents, it has been mentioned that Dibakar Sahoo got employment as Basanta Sahoo and his name has been mentioned as Dibakar Sahoo @ Basanta Sahoo. In the fact finding report dated 29th September, Page 4 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 11-Jul-2025 11:48:17 2022 (Annexure-9) it is observed that said Dibakar Sahoo might be the son-in-law of Kathi Sahoo. Although, Basanta Sahoo, father of Petitioner purportedly is pursuing his claims for employment of his son-the Petitioner since the year 2013, but, neither the Petitioner nor his father Basanta Sahoo had ever challenged employment of Dibakar Sahoo as son of Kathi Sahoo or impersonation as Basanta Sahoo before any authority or Court of law. It is not disputed that Dibakar Sahoo was given appointment as nominee of Kathi Sahoo and continued in employment under MCL from the year 1991 to 2018, although he is not the son of Kathi Sahoo. After Dibakar Sahoo left his job in the year 2018 and reportedly died soon thereafter, Basanta Sahoo, father of the Petitioner, for the first time approached this Court in the year 2023 by filing W.P.(C).
Arguments
3. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the grandfather of the Petitioner, namely, Kathi Sahoo was a land oustee for acquisition of land for Hingula Area, MCL. The name of Basanta Sahoo, father of the petitioner was in the list of nominees of Kathi Sahoo. Rehabilitation benefit had not been availed by Basanta Sahoo, as he was employed under NALCO and he wanted rehabilitation employment in favour of his son, the Petitioner. In Page 1 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 11-Jul-2025 11:48:17 the final genealogy report supplied by the State Government , it was mentioned that Basanta Sahoo ( Dibakar Sahoo) had been provided with employment for which further enquiry was required about his identity. The Petitioner was not born by the time nomination was made by Kathi Sahoo. When he became major, his father claimed employment under the Rehabilitation Scheme in the year 2013 for him. Thereafter, he submitted a representation. They were pursuing the matter throughout. The said Dibakar Sahoo tendered his resignation in the year 2018 before his superannuation. Accordingly, the Petitioner pursued the MCL Authorities to provide employment under the Rehabilitation Scheme. The Committee constituted for deliberating on the case of the father of the Petitioner had sought for legal opinion and the empaneled Senior Counsel had opined that case of Basanta Sahoo should be favourably considered. Since his case was not considered, Basanta Sahoo, father of the Petitioner moved this Court in W.P.(C). No.27208 of 2023. This Court vide order dated 11th October, 2023 disposed of the writ petition with a direction to dispose of his representation pending before the MCL Authorities. Accordingly order under Annexure-17 was passed rejecting his representation. 4. In course of argument, Mr. Das, learned counsel for the Petitioner drew attention of this Court to the report dated 29th September, 2022 (Annexure-9) submitted by a Committee constituted vide order dated 27th July, 2022 for the purpose of finding out the facts with regard to the allegation of the Petitioner. The Committee after deliberations made the following observations: • “There is no record to show that the Recorded Tenant Kathi Sahoo or his son Basanta Sahoo had nominated Dibakar Sahoo for employment in place of Basanta Sahoo. Page 2 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 11-Jul-2025 11:48:17 • The Legal Heir certificate of Lt Kathi Sahoo issued by Tahasildar Talcher (Annexure G) does not contain the name of Dibakar Sahoo as his son. However, it contains the name of Basanta Sahoo as son of Lt Kathi Sahoo. • From the service record of Dibakar Sahoo (Annexure F) it is seen that he has declared his wife as Janha Sahoo. The Legal Heir certificate of Kathi Sahoo and FGR supplied by SpI LAO-MCL contains the name of Janha Dehury, Dibakar Sohoo has also mentioned his father as Kathi Sahoo in his service record. It may be possible that Dibakar Sahoo is actually the son-in-law of Lt Kathi Sahoo and he has impersonated as the son of Kathi Sahoo to get employment from MCL. • • There is no record available at L&R Dept, Hingula Area to clarify on what ground Dibakar Sahoo has been extended with employment benefit from MCL, as a land oustee of Danara in place of Basanta Sahoo. • There is no record available at L&R Dept, Hingula Area rolled to employment processing file at Dibakar Sahoo. • Basanta Sahoo S/o Kathi Sahoo has been claiming employment for his son since 2013-application dt. 15.03.2013-copy attached at Annexure I.” 5. He, therefore, submits that Dibakar Sahoo was never nominated by Kathi Sahoo, the grandfather of the Petitioner, who was a land oustee. By practicing fraud, said Dibakar Sahoo got the employment in the year 1991 and continued till the year 2018. His continuance does not preclude the Petitioner, who is a genuine claimant to get the benefit under the Rehabilitation Scheme. This aspect was not discussed while taking a decision on his representation as at Annexure-17. He, therefore, submits that the impugned order under Annexure-17 warrants interference and a direction may be issued to provide employment to the Petitioner. 6. Upon hearing Mr. Das, learned counsel for the Petitioner and on perusal of the record, it reveals that vide order dated 17th March, 2025, a Coordinate Bench has passed the following order in the present Writ Petition: This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video “ conferencing/physical mode). Page 3 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 11-Jul-2025 11:48:17 In pursuance of the order dated 06.03.2025, Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an additional affidavit for of rehabilitation of the displaced persons/families due to S.E.C.L. projects at Sambalpur and Dhenkanal districts. the petitioner along with the uniform guidelines Learned counsel for the State placed the impugned order dated 17.09.2024 under Annexure-17 which clearly shows that Kathi Sahoo, son of Saheb Sahoo nominated his another son Dibakar Sahoo for service in place of Basanta Sahoo as Basanta Sahoo was employed in NALCO and the said Dibakar Sahoo has enjoyed the service benefit from MCL being nominated by Kathi Sahoo in place of Basanta Sahoo from 1991 to 2018 i.e. for twenty seven years. It is further mentioned in the impugned order that MCL has already provided three employment benefits in the family of Kathi Sahoo and it cannot provide the fourth employment benefit against the land acquisition after providing all due benefits in the family of Kathi Sahoo. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that when the nomination of Dibakar Sahoo was made, the petitioner was not born at that time. However, he submits that Dibakar Sahoo was not the son of Kathi Sahoo.
Decision
No.27208 of 2023, which was disposed of on 11th October, 2023 by a learned Single Judge with a direction for disposal of his representation. 8. The representation was rejected on 27th December, 2023 (Annexure-13) by the Opposite Party No.2 General Manager, Hingula Area, Mahanadi Coal Fields Limited. The said order has, however, not been challenged. 9. But, thereafter, another representation was filed by the Petitioner on 17th August, 2024 for grant of rehabilitation appointment. This has again been rejected by the Opposite Party No. 2 by a reasoned order referring to the earlier order dated 27th December, 2023 and stating as follows : - “ The District Administration had tentatively identified Pravati Sahoo D/o Tirthabasi Sahoo (GDtr/o Kathi Sahoo) - vide L No. 326 dt 24.05.1989 (SI No. 129), Tripura Sahoo and Basanta Sahoo Ss/o Kathi Sahoo - vide L No. 554 dl 22.10.1990 (SI No. 2 & 3) for rehabilitation benefits. While Pravati Sahoo, Tripura Sahoo were provided with employment Page 5 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 11-Jul-2025 11:48:17 benefit in SECL, Kathi Sahoo S/o- Saheb Sahoo nominated his another son Dibakar Sahoo for service in place of Basanta Sahoo as Basanta Sahoo was employed in NALCO. He had also undertaken in the same affidavit that he or any of his heirs do not have any objection if Dibakar Sahoo gets the service benefit in SECL. Basanta Sahoo or any other heirs of Kathi Sahoo had no objection to the service of Dibakar Sahoo from 1991 to 2013 i.e., for 22 years after which Basanta Sahoo first came forward with the claim of rehabilitation benefit to one member of his family vide his application dt 15.02.2013 addressed to the General Manager Hingula Area. Dibakar Sahoo resigned from the services of MCL with effect from 05.11.2018-three years before his date of superannuation which would have been 31.01.2022. MCL has provided already provided 03 employment benefits in the family of Kathi Sahoo S/o- Saheb Sahoo of village Danara against land acquisition. Dibakar Sahoo has enjoyed the service benefit from MCL being nominated by Kathi Sahoo in place of Basanta Sahoo from 1991 to 2018 i.e., for 27 years. MCL cannot provide a further 4th employment benefit against land acquisition after providing all due benefits in the family of Kathi Sahoo S/o Saheb Sahoo. Basanta Ku Sahoo had filed a writ petition in the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa W.P.(C) No 27208 of 2023 praying for rehabilitation benefit to his son Asish Kumar Sahoo in MCL. The Hon’ble Court in its order no. 01 dt. 11.10.2023 had directed the undersigned to consider the representation and pass a speaking and reasoned order within a period of 02 months from the communication of order. The undersigned vide his letter dt. 759; dt: 27.12.2023- copy attached-had passed the order that as MCL has already provided 03 employment benefits, no further employment benefit can be considered in the family of Kathi Sahoo. As the claim of rehabilitation benefit to Asish Kumar Sahoo S/o Basanta Kumar Sahoo has already been disposed off by the undersigned in compliance to the order of Hon’ble High Court in W.P.(C) No 27208 of 2023, MCL cannot consider your present claim of rehabilitation benefit.” 10. It is also revealed from the record that the Petitioner was not born by the time the nomination, if any, was made by the land oustee, namely, Kathi Sahoo. Three persons were nominated to be provided jobs, and three jobs/employment benefits have been provided to the family of the land oustee Kathi Sahoo. Basanta Page 6 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 11-Jul-2025 11:48:17 Sahoo, the father of the Petitioner, during the lifetime of Dibakar Sahoo had never raised any objection to the employment of Dibakar Sahoo as a nominee of Kathi Sahoo or that Dibakar Sahoo had impersonated him. Dibakar Sahoo continued in service from the year 1991 to 2018, i.e., for a period of 27 years. The father of the Petitioner raised his claim during continuance of Dibakar Sahoo in service without challenging his appointment in any Court of law as discussed earlier. 11. In view of the above discussions, this writ petition merits no consideration and is accordingly dismissed. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge Rojalin (Savitri Ratho) Judge Page 7 of 7