No need to provide jobs for displaced families of NPCIL: HC
Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has ruled that there was no need to provide jobs for the families displaced by the Koodankulam Nuclear Power project in Tirunelveli district.
By PTI |
MADURAI: Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has ruled that there was no need to provide jobs for the families displaced by the Koodankulam Nuclear Power project in Tirunelveli district and those who had sold their lands could not demand employment in the project.
Taking a different view from that of the single judge, Justice F M Ibrahim Kalifullah and Justice S Palanivelu said those who had lost land could not be offered jobs unless the employer formulated such a scheme.
Allowing a writ appeal by the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL), the judges said that though the Tamil Nadu Government Order of 1978 stipulated that displaced families should be given preference in employment, it would apply only to the Public Sector undertakings of the state government and not central government.
Besides, the GO was only administrative instruction and there was no legal binding upon any individual or undertaking.
Even the doctrine of Promisory Estoppel in which a non-contractural promise may be enforceable to avoid injustice, cannot be pressed in the present case because state government had no role in the affairs of the NPCIL, except that it helped the corporation acquire land.
Taking a different view from that of the single judge, Justice F M Ibrahim Kalifullah and Justice S Palanivelu said those who had lost land could not be offered jobs unless the employer formulated such a scheme.
Allowing a writ appeal by the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL), the judges said that though the Tamil Nadu Government Order of 1978 stipulated that displaced families should be given preference in employment, it would apply only to the Public Sector undertakings of the state government and not central government.
Besides, the GO was only administrative instruction and there was no legal binding upon any individual or undertaking.
Even the doctrine of Promisory Estoppel in which a non-contractural promise may be enforceable to avoid injustice, cannot be pressed in the present case because state government had no role in the affairs of the NPCIL, except that it helped the corporation acquire land.
Download
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
Download
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
ADVERTISEMENT
