CG High Court: Internal Cut-off Dates Cannot Deny Land Oustee Rights

News Citation : 2026 LN (HC) 237 | 2026:CGHC:15706-DB

April 7, 2026 : In a significant ruling, the High Court of Chhattisgarh has reinforced the principle that internal administrative decisions cannot be used to strip citizens of their legal rights unless they are properly notified to the public. The Division Bench, led by Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, recently modified a previous order involving South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. (SECL), balancing the scales between a decades-long employment dispute and reasonable monetary recompense.

The case originated from a 1993 land purchase by Mahendra Kumar Sahu, an advocate who at the time was seeking stability after his 1.21-acre plot in Village Govindpur was acquired for mining operations. While Sahu received a small initial compensation of ₹31,291 in 2002, his subsequent applications for employment under the state’s 1991 rehabilitation policy were repeatedly rejected. SECL authorities argued that because Sahu purchased the land after a “cut-off date” of September 30, 1991, he was ineligible for a job.

However, the High Court found a glaring issue with this defense: the cut-off date was based on an internal communication between SECL and the District Collector that was never officially published or made known to the affected villagers. The court emphasized that administrative decisions carrying “civil consequences” must be transparent, noting that an undisclosed arrangement cannot be enforced to an individual’s detriment.

Despite upholding the illegality of the rejection, the Division Bench took a pragmatic turn during the final hearing. Sahu, now a practicing advocate who has been litigating this matter since 2012, informed the court that he would be satisfied with reasonable compensation in lieu of a job. SECL representatives agreed to this resolution, seeking to bring a definitive end to the long-standing dispute.

While a Single Judge had previously awarded Sahu ₹10,00,000 in compensation for the discrimination and delay, the Division Bench deemed this amount slightly excessive given the lack of proven “mala fides” or deliberate wrongdoing by the appellants. Consequently, the court reduced the award to ₹5,00,000, which must be paid within 30 days. This decision effectively settles the matter, providing the petitioner with fair recompense for years of litigation while setting a firm precedent against the use of “backdoor” administrative policies to deny rehabilitation benefits.

Case Reference : In the matter of WA No. 272 of 2026, the High Court of Chhattisgarh heard the case of South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. & Another vs. Mahendra Kumar Sahu & Others, with the appellants represented by Senior Advocate Mr. Manoj Paranjpe (assisted by Mr. Pankaj Singh and Mr. Harsh Dave), Respondent No. 1 Mr. Mahendra Kumar Sahu appearing in person, and the State (Respondents No. 2 & 3) represented by Deputy Advocate General Mr. Prasun Kumar Bhaduri.