1 2025:CGHC:15706 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2462 of 2019 • Harsh Chhabda S/o Shri Surendre Singh Chhabda Aged About 26 Years R/o Tarbahar, Sirgitti, Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mantralaya, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. The Under Secretary Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. The Secretary Department Of Commerce And Industry, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4. The Collector Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 5. The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Aditya Agrawal, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Rajat Agrawal, Advocate For Respondents/State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 03/04/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 A writ and / or an order directing the respondent State authorities to produce before this Hon’ble Court all the records pertaining to acquisition proceedings of petitioner’s land for its perusal especially with respect to the land of the petitioner. 10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly direct the respondent state to provide the detail of quantum of solatium and amount Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI 2 of compensation to the petitioner, as defined under Section 21 (2) of the Act 2013, so the petitioner may raise objection, if any disputes arises. 10.3 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly direct the land acquisition authority to draw the compensation amount so allotted against the abovementioned land in favor of the present petitioner and provide all the requisite solatium amount including other benefits as provided under the Act of 2013 and as per the guidelines framed for the year 2013-14. 10.4 The Hon’ble Court may kind enough to take Suo Moto cognizance of the concerned authorities of the respondent state, who violates the proceedings under the provisions of Act 2013. 10.5 Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. 10.6 Cost of the petition may also be awarded.” 2. Mr. Aditya Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pleads no instruction. 3. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti