1 2025:CGHC:49295 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1843 of 2023 1 - Deepak Sahu S/o (Late) Tarachand Sahu Aged About 48 Years R/o 21/ 32 Bundalow, Hudco Bhilai (West), Tehsil Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar (Naya Raipur), District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Secretary Department Of Technical Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar (Naya Raipur), District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Commissioner / Joint Secretary Directorate, Technical Education, Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Indian Institute Of Technology Bhilai Through It Vice Chancellor (Administration), I I T, Bhilai, G E C, Campus, Sezbahar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Collector Durg Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh 2 6 - Sub Divisional Officer (R) Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh 7 - Nayab Tehsildar Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Mahendra Dubey, Advocate For Respondents 1 to 3 & 5 to 7/State : Ms. Upasna Mehta, Dy.GA For Respondent No.4 Dr. Shiv Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 25/09/2025 By way of this petition, the petitioner is seeking direction against the inaction of the respondents particularly, respondent No.5/Collector, Durg, directing enforcement of the contractual legal obligations arsing from the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 13.08.2021 and the subsequent deeds of land exchange executed between the Petitioner, the State of Chhatsigarh and the Indian Institute of Technology, Bhilai (IIT Bhilai). 2. Facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner and the State of Chhattisgarh entered into an MoU on 13.08.2021, primarily concerning the exchange and swapping of designated parcels of land for the purpose of constructing the IIT Bhilai campus. In accordance with the MoU, the petitioner and IIT Bhilai fulfilled their contractual obligations by executing a registered Deed of Land Exchange on 17.11.2021, which resulted in the swapping of land parcels with IIT Bhilai taking possession 3 and utilizing the petitioner’s land for campus construction. 3. The MoU stipulated that the land exchange would be completed in three parts with the second part involving the exchange of government land Khasra No. 91/1 (area 0.66 hectares) with the petitioner’s land bearing Khasra No. 19/2, 22/1 and 22/2 (total area approximately 0.46 hectares). Despite the petitioner’s and IIT Bhilai’s full compliance and the execution of the deed dated 17.11.2021, the respondents have failed to perform their contractual obligation of executing the deed of land exchange concerning the second part of the MoU ie. swapping the government land bearing Khasra No. 91/1 with the petitioners land. Various reports, site visits, and orders have been issued by the respondents but no final deed or formal execution has taken place, causing unwarranted delay, depr5ving the petitioner of rightful ownership and breaching contractual obligations. 4. The respondents have a legal constitutional and equitable obligation to act in accordance with the MoU and to perform their duite4s in fulfilling contractual commitments, especially since the Petitioner has already complied with all the conditions. The delay is arbitrary and unconstitutional causing prejudice and infringing upon the petitioner’s right to property and contractual enforcement guaranteed under Article 300 A of the Constitution and judicial pronouncements regarding enforceability of MoUs. The conduct of the respondents amounts to neglect, inaction and violation of statutory and contractual duties warranting intervention by this Court under its jurisdiction under Article 226. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner has 4 sought for the following reliefs: 10.1. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction, directing the respondents particularly to the respondent No.5/Collecltor, durg, District Durg CG to perform the second part of MoU dated 13.08.2021 and execute the Deed of Land Exchange swapping the government land bearing Khasra NO. 91/1 area 0.66 hectares with the petitioner’s land bearing Khasra NO. 19/2,22/1 and 22/2 respective area 0.09, 0.31 approx. and 0.05 hectares total 0.46 hectares within a given time frame. 10.2. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass any other order which may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances.” 6. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner had, on the request of the State agreed to the proposal for exchange/swapping of land for the purpose of construction of Indian Institute of Technology, Bhilai, District Durg CG. Upon discussions at the administrative level, a tripartite meeting was convened in the office of the respondent authorities on 06.08.2021 in the presence of respondent No. 6 & 7, representatives of IIT Bhilai, revenue officers concerned and the petitioner. Pursuant to the said meeting, a Memorandum of Understanding dated 13.08.2021 was prepared and signed by the State Government, IIT Bhilai and the petitioner delineating the terms of exchange/swapping of land. 7. The MoU prescribes a three stage process: The first stage, involving exchange of Petitioner's land (Khasra 5 No. 20 and part of 19/1, area 0.92 hectares) with the land of IIT Bhilai (Khasra NO. 91/2, area 0.92 hectares has been duly completed by execution of the registered Deed of Land Exchange dated 17.11.2021 and possession has already been taken and utilized by IIT Bhilai. The second stage, relevant for the present petition concerns exchange of government land (Khasra No. 91/1, area 0.66 hectares) with petitioner's land ( Khasra No. 19/2,22/1 and 22/2 area 0.46 hectares). Despite the petitioner and IIT Bhilai having fulfilled their respective obligations and various official reports having been submitted by revenue authorities, the Respondent State authorities have failed to execute the Deed of Land Exchange with the Petitioner for more than one and half years, without justifiable cause. 8. It is further submitted that the failure of the State to perform its part of the concluded MoU despite the petitioner /having relinquished possession and rights over its land and the IIT having undertaken construction, is violative of Articles 14 and 300 A of the Constitution of India, as well as settled principles of administrative fairness and promissory estoppel. The respondents have not executed the Deed of Land Exchange with the petitioner despite full compliance by both the petitioner and IIT, Bhilai with the respective obligations under the tripartite agreement, resulting in serious prejudice and persistent deprivation of the petitioner’s legitimate rights. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the the petitioner has made repeated requests by personally visiting the office of respondent No.5 and submitted written representations seeking time bound compliance with the terms of the MoU. However, no positive or 6 objective response has been forthcoming and the arbitrary delay and non-bonafide inaction of the respondent No.5 have persisted. The petitioner submitted a detailed representation dated 07.06.2022 to the Commissioner, Durg, Chhattisgarh urging immediate issuance of directions for implementation of the agreement. Furthermore, IIT Bhilai also addressed a letter dated 30.08.2022 to the Collector, Durg requesting that updated information be provided to the Petitioner. Yet no meaningful progress has occurred and the respondent authorities (Nos. 5,6 & 7) have neither kept the petitioner informed nor issued any updates regarding the proceedings for land exchange. 10. It is submitted that such arbitrary inaction and unreasonable indecision by respondent No.5 in the matter of land exchange prompted the petitioner to seek recourse to law by filing WPC No. 4652/2022 before this Court and vide order dated 14.11.2022, this Court has disposed of the petitioner with a direction to the respondents No. 5 to 7 to ensure compliance with the agreement entered into between the petitioner, State and IIT Bhilai (respondent No.4) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order. The relevant operative portion of the order dated 14.11.2022 is extracted below: “Given the limited grievance that has, the writ petition as on now stands disposed of directing the respondents No. 5 to 7 to take appropriate steps in accordance with law ensuring that the agreement entered into between the petitioner and the respondent along with respondent No.4 institute be complied and honoured with at the earliest preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.” 7 11. It is submitted that the petitioner had provided his valuable land to the IIT Bhilai under the Deed of Land Exchange dated 17.11.2021 for the construction of a prestigious educational institute. While IIT has already taken possession of the land and commenced construction, the finalization of the land exchange with the government has been inexplicably delayed. It is submitted that vide order dated 15.11.2021 respondent No.5 had categorically opined that the exchange of the petitioner’s land with the government land for the benefit of the IIT was in the public interest. It has held that : “‘kklu }kjk vkbZ vkbZ-Vh dks cnys esa fn;s tkus gsrq vkbZ-vkbZ-Vh dSEil ls yxh gqbZ vkosnd nhid lkgw dh futh Hkwfe dks ‘kkldh; Hkwfe ds lkFk vnyk cnyh djuk pkgrh gS tks loZFkk fgr ess gSA” 12. The Collector, Durg after receiving the revised report dated 14.12.2021 from respondent No.6 referred the matter to the Additional Collector, Durg directing a site inspection and factual report vide order dated 20.12.2021. It was concluded that : “mijksDrkuqlkj la;qDr LFky tkap izfrosnu ds vk/kkj ij izLrkfor Hkwfe rcknyk Lohdkj dj uD’kk la’kksf/kr fd;s tkus dk vkns’k ikfjr d;s tkus dk vkns’k ikfjr fd;k tkuk mfpr gksxkA” Thus, the inconsistency as pointed out by the respondent No.5 vide order dated 15.11.2021 has been duly rectified and evidently corrected by respondent No.6 and thus, the respondent No.5 is legally bound and obligated in terms of the agreement. 13. It is further submitted that the Addl. Collector, Durg without 8 justification vide order dated 07.02.2022 held that neither the land exchange nor a tripartite agreement was required contrary to the earlier findings of respondents No. 5 & 6 who had recommended acceptance of the land exchange based on site inspections and reports dated 10.12.2021 and 14.12.2021. The petitioner’s land which was given in exchange for government land as per the agreement dated 13.08.2021 has therefore been wrongly held up, causing unwarranted delays despite clear legal and factual basis for completion. Respondent authorities have failed to perform their obligations under the said agreement thereby necessitating intervention of this Court. 14. It is submitted that the petitioner in compliance with the above order has fully cooperated with the respondent authorities and met all necessary requirements and yet the non-action of the respondents in executing the Deed of Land Exchange persists, warranting the directions sought herein. It is therefore submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that direction may be issued to the respondent No.5/Collector, Durg to forthwith execute the Deed of Land Exchange as agreed within a fixed time frame, to ensure competition of the transaction in accordance with law and justice. 15. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand, submits that the claim of the petitioner for land exchange under the tripartite Memorandum of Understanding dated 13.08.2021 involves the distinct proposals concerning swapping of land parcels between the parties, namely IIT Bhilai, Government of Chhattisgarh and the petitioner. i. The first part of the MoU (Proposal No.1) involving exchange of land between IIT Bhilai and the petitioner (land bearing Khasra No. 901/2 9 measuring 0.92 hectares swapped against land bearing Khasra Nos. 19/1 and 20 belonging to the petitioner totalling 0.92 hectares) has been duly complied with by the parties and a registered Deed of Land Exchange dated 17.11.2021 has been executed in respect thereof. ii. The second part of the MoU (Proposal No.2) contemplates exchange of government land bearing Khasra No. 91/1, area 0.66 hectares with the petitioner’s land bearing Khasra Nos. 19/2, 22/1 and22/2 totalling 0.46 hectares. However, she submits that this portion of the exchange has not taken place as envisaged because the petitioner has not relinquished possession or delivered the said land to the Government for transfer. The land owned by the petitioner remains recorded in their name and has not been physically or legally handed over to the government authorities. This non-compliance on the part of the petitioner has consequently resulted in the government being unable to transfer the corresponding land to IIT Bhilai for their campus construction. 16. Proposal No. 3 relates to exchange of certain land between the government and IIT Bhilai which is not directly relevant for this petition. She further submits that on 14.12.2022 the competent authority ie. the Sub divisional officer (Revenue) Durg passed a reasoned and specific speaking order in Revenue Case No.202102103400121/A-19(1)/2021- 22 rejecting the petitioner’s claim for the land exchange, observing that the petitioner has failed to comply with the terms under proposal No,.2 of the tripartite agreement. Notably, this order has attained finality as it was not challenged by the petitioner before any court, making the present petition not maintainable. 10 17. A spot inspection conducted on 19.08.2022 establish that the land in question bearing Khasra No. 91/1 remains unused by the IIT Bhilai and the petitioner's land has not ben surrendered or utilized by the government or IIT Bhilai. The panchnama recorded that the petitioner's land continues to be their property and has not been encroached or used unlawfully. It is thus asserted by the counsel for the State that the petitioner has not complied with the terms of the tripartite MoU relating to the proposal No. 2 and as a consequence no land exchange can be effected under that proposal. The registered exchange and construction activities relate only to the land involved in proposal No.1. Therefore, it is submitted that the petitioner is devoid of merits and barred by the final order of Revenue Authority. 18. Counsel for respondent No.4/IIT Bhilai submits that the institute is a national institution of importance established under the institutes of Technology Act, 1961 (as amended) and has allotted land for its campus development in villages Kutelabhatha and Khapri, district Durg, CG. IIT Bhilai reiterates full compliance with the MoU dated 13.08.2021 particularly with respect of Proposal No.1 wherein the land exchange with the petitioner has been effectuated by way of the registered Deed of land Exchange dated 17.11.2021. The institute has taken possession of the said land and initiated constructions within its assigned boundaries. IIT Bhilai has not encroached upon or used the land under dispute (Khasra No. 91/1) as such land has not been transferred to them owing to the non-compliance of conditions by the petitioner. There is no grievance or complaint against IIT Bhilai regarding the subject land under the MoU. The Institute supports the State’s executive actions and 11 submits that the petitioner must fulfill their obligations to facilitate any further land exchange. IIT Bhilai has no objection to the directions of this Court that the exchange under the second proposal be consummated if the petitioner complies with all the conditions forthwith. 19. Having been heard and considered with respect of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as the material on record, the Court finds that there exists a tripartite MoU dated 13.08.2021 among the petitioner, State represented by the Collector and IIT Bhilai for exchange of distinct parcels of land as part of a larger arrangement to facilitate the institutional development. The petitioner and IIT Bhilai have performed their obligations asper proposal No.1 of the MoU culminating in the registered Deed of Land Exchange dated 17.11.2021 for land measuring approximately 0.92 hectares and construction is underway by IIT Bhilai on the exchanged land. It is not disputed that the State is duty bound to perform its obligations under proposal No.2 which involves exchange of government land bearing Khasra NO. 91/1 area 0.66 hectares with land owned by the petitioner bearing Khasra Nos. 19/2,22/1 and 22/2 aggregating approximately 0.46 hectares. 20. The order of the Revenue authority dated 14.12.2022 which remains unchallenged and final records that the petitioner has failed to surrender or transfer the land required under proposal No. 2 thereby forestalling the government's ability to transfer the government land to IIT Bhilai. Despite this finding, this court observes that the petitioner has continued to seek enforcement of the land exchange without addressing deficiency noted in the revenue order. Nonetheless the Court recognizes 12 that the petitioner is the “eminent party” to the tripartite MoU and that all parties have a continuing interest in concluding the transaction fairly and promptly. 21. Thus, it is directed that the respondent No.5/Collector Durg afford opportunity to the petitioner to comply with the conditions necessary for the transfer of the specified land. The petitioner shall provide possession and title documents for land bearing Khasra No. 19/2, 22/1 and 22/2 aggregating approximately 0.46 hectares and upon such compliance the respondent authorities shall forthwith execute the Deed of Land Exchange and take all consequential steps to effectuate the exchange in accordance with the MoU. The State authorities shall keep both the petitioner and the IIT Bhilai informed of all developments and facilitate transparency. The writ petition is allowed in the above terms. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.10.09 11:28:39 +0530