1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1977 of 2019 1 - Lala Ram S/o Khajan Singh Aged About 50 Years R/o Village- Bhiragaon, Patwari Halka No. 16, Revenue Circle And Tahsil- Bhanupratappur, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh 2 - Mangli Bai W/o Lal Ram Aged About 48 Years R/o Village- Bhiragaon, Patwari Halka No. 16, Revenue Circle And Tahsil- Bhanupratappur, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The District Collector Kanker, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintendent Of Police Kanker, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh 4 - Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Corpopration Ltd. Through The Superintending Engineer, Durg, Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub- Divisional Forest Officer Bhanupratappur, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh NIRMALA RAO 2 6 - Sub- Divisional Officer (Revenue) District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh 7 - Patwari Patwari Halka No. 16, Bhiragaon, District- Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Shri T.K. Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, Addl. A.G. For Respondents No.2 to 4 : Shri Jitendra Pali, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 03.09.2025 1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following reliefs: “10.1 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 to 5 to immediately stop the cutting of the planted tree of the petitioners as situated at their field. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to order that in case the trees are to be cut down in public interest which is necessary then the respondent no. 4 should direct to pay the appropriate compensation as per market value as loss of income of the petitioners. 10.3 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in favour of the petitioners may kindly be passed.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that for the erection of high-tension towers, various trees and plants were cut by the respondent authorities. He would contend that according 3 to the order passed by the Collector, respondents No.2 to 4 are under an obligation to plant double the number of trees that were cut from the petitioners’ land, within a period of 90 days. He would submit that till date, that part of order passed by the Collector has not been complied with. He would further contend that the petitioners have not been paid proper compensation. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners. They would submit that the petitioners have the remedy to approach the District Judge or the District Magistrate according to the provisions of Section 16 of the Indian Telegraphy Act, 1885, for claiming compensation etc. 4. With regard to the plantation, learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 4 would submit that the funds reserved for the same have already been transferred to the State Government, and it is now for the State to carry out the plantation of trees at appropriate locations. 5. Considering the submissions made by counsel for the parties, this petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioners to move an appropriate application before the Competent Authority, claiming adequate compensation according to the provisions of Sections 10 & 16 of the Act, 1885. With regard to the plantation of trees, since it has been submitted by counsel for respondents No.2 to 4 that the funds reserved for this purpose have already been transferred to the State, respondent No.1 is 4 directed to look into the matter and take appropriate steps for the plantation of trees within a period of one year, if the same has not already been done pursuant to the order passed by the Collector dated 27.6.2019. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s), this petition is disposed of. 7. Interim relief granted earlier is hereby vacated. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi