1 2025:CGHC:876 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 779 of 2019 Janiram S/o Late Vishram Aged About 74 Years R/o Village - Murlidih, Tahsil And Police Station Akaltara District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Collector Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. 3. Land Acquisition Officer / Sub Divsional Officer (Revenue), Akaltara, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Ravi Maheshwari, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Rajeev Bharat, Govt. Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 07/01/2025 1. By way of this petition, petitioner has sought following relief(s):- 10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to restrain the respondent authorities from making road over land of the petitioner without paying compensation and without acquiring the land, in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to make payment of compensation as per market value in accordance with provision of the Act, 2013 along with interest of 18%, in the interest of justice. 10.3 Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted. 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the lands bearing Khasra Nos. 1080/3, 1081/2 and 1436/1 total ad-measuring 0.364 hectare situated at Village Murlidih, Tehsil & P.S. Akaltara, District- Janjgir Champa (C.G.) are recorded in the name of petitioner. He further submits that State Government constructed a road and used the lands of petitioner without acquisition and without making payment of compensation. He contends that petitioner approached the respondent authorities many times but no heed was paid. He further contends that lands of petitioner cannot be used for construction of road without acquisition. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that petitioner has not placed any document on record to demonstrate that his lands were used for construction of road. He further submits that petitioner has also not placed on record the demarcation report to substantiate his argument. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents available on record. 5. Taking into consideration the pleadings made in the writ petition, this petition is disposed of directing Collector, Janjgir Champa i.e. respondent No. 2 to conduct a demarcation to ascertain as to whether land of petitioner has been used for construction of road and if it is found that the land of petitioner has been used for construction of road, appropriate steps shall be taken by the respondent authorities with regard to acquisition and payment of compensation. 3 6. The entire exercise shall be completed by the respondent authorities, preferably, within period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observation(s) & direction(s), instant writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Ajinkya