Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 55533 (CHH)

SMT. SHANTI BAI ADITYA (KAHRA) v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/6624/2025 · 2025-12-18

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:61748 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 6624 of 2025 Smt. Shanti Bai Aditya (Kahra) W/o Ramayan Aditya Aged About 37 Years R/o Village- Mirouni, Tahsil- Malkharouda, District : Sakti, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector Sakti, District : Sakti, Chhattisgarh 4 - Sub-Divisional Officer (R) / Land Acquisition Officer Malkharouda, District : Sakti, Chhattisgarh 5 - Executive Engineer Jal Sansadhan Sambhag, Janjgir Head Quarter Champa Water Resources Department, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Sangeeta Sahu, Advocate appears along with Ms. Padmini Kurree, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. F.S. Khare, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, Government Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.12.23 10:42:46 +0530 2 19 /12/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/order/direction, directing the respondents to decide the pending representation dated 28.04.2025 (Annexure P/3) and pay the compensation under Land Acquisition Act, 2013 without delay to the petitioner for the land of petitioner which has been acquired for construction of Mirouni Barrage Stop Dam. 10.2 That, if the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper may kindly be pleased call for the entire records pertaining to the petitioner’s matter. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of the land bearing Khasra No. 817 admeasuring 0.0530 hectares and Khasra no. 919 area 0.0570 hectare situated at Village Mirouni, P.H.N. 19, R.N.M. Chhapora, Tahsil Malkharouda, District Sakti, the maximum part of the land owned by the petitioner of the aforementioned khasra numbers were affected by the construction of Mirouni Barrage Stop Dam over Mahanadi Bridge. However, at the time of initiating proceedings of land acquisition of the other persons, land of the petitioner was not included in the notification and passing of the award of the affected land, the award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 03.01.2017. The respondents paid the compensation to other land owner but compensation has not been paid to the petitioner. Petitioner has made several oral requests to the authorities, however, it was not 3 not considered and thereafter, petitioner submitted a representation before the Respondents No. 3 to 5 on 28.04.2025, however, till date, it has not been considered and no decision has been taken and therefore, direction be issued to the Respondents No. 3 to 5 to consider and take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner within specified time. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents/State submits that there is an inordinate delay in filing of the writ petition and the representation before the competent authority. He further submits that if the representation is still pending consideration, it will be considered and appropriate orders will be passed in accordance with law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents placed on record. 5. On due consideration of the submission of counsel for the parties, nature of grievance raised by the petitioner, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing the Respondents No. 3 to 5 to consider and take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 06 months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. 6. With the aforesaid observation and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) alfiza Judge