Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 161 (CHH)

IN THE MATTER OF SUO MOTO PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPPIL/3/2026 · 2026-02-08

Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Public Interest Litigationbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:7022-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPPIL No. 3 of 2026 In The Matter Of Suo Moto Public Interest Litigation Based On News Item Published In Navbharat Sunday Nyaydhani, Bilaspur, Dated 18th January, 2026 Namely Vidamna- Mohra Aur Hardidih Ke Bich Bna Stopdam Grahmino Ke Liye Anupyogi Sabit Ho Rha, Bnane Ki Kr Rhe Mang. 12 Years Me Nhi Bn Ska Stopdam Sadak Se Bhi Nhi Joda Ja Ska. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Chief Secretary, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Principal Secretary Public Works Department, Mahandi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Secretary, Public Health And Engineering Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Chhattisgarh. SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.02.10 09:34:48 +0530 2 4 - Engineer In Chief Public Health And Engineering Department, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Collector District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Chief Engineer Public Health And Engineering Department, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 8 - The Secretary Water Resources Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Raipur ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is on Office Reference. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 09.02.2026 1. Heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General for the State. 2. In compliance of the Court’s order dated 19.01.2026, Mr. Rajesh Sukumar Toppo, Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, Department of Water Resources has filed fresh affidavit, which is quoted herein-below:- 3 “1. That, the present affidavit is being filed in compliance of the order dated 19/01/2026 passed by the Hon'ble Court. 2. That, the present Public Interest Litigation has been registered by the Hon'ble Court taking suo moto cognizance of the news item published in daily newspaper "Navbharat" dated 18/01/2026 titled as "12 Salo Me Nahi Ban Saka Stop Dam, Sadak Se Bhi Nahi Joda Ja Saka." In the said news item, it has been stated that the stop dam sanctioned over the Kharung River (wrongly mentioned as Kharun in the news item) was sanctioned in the year 2013-14, however, the said construction of stop dam is of no use to the public at large and further it is not serving the purpose for which it was constructed. 3. That, taking cognizance of the above mentioned news item, the matter was taken up for hearing by the Hon'ble Court on 19/01/2026 and taking note of the said news item, the Hon'ble Court was pleased to direct the Secretary, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Department of Water Resources to file his personal affidavit with respect to the above mentioned news item and steps taken for construction of approach road. 4. That, in compliance of the order passed by the Hon'ble Court dated 19/01/2026, the deponent respectfully submits as under :- a. That, he has the highest regards and great respect for the lawful authority of this Hon'ble Court and its orders and directions issued from time to time. b. That, Department of Water Resources, Government of Chhattisgarh granted administrative approval / sanction for construction of Anicut (Stop Dam) over Kharung River in village Mohra (Hardideeh) Block Belha and an amount sanctioned for the said work was Rs. 4,97,28,000/-. A copy of the order dated 14/06/2012 is being filed herewith 4 as Annexure A/1. c. That, the core object behind sanctioning the said project was to construct an anicut (stop dam) over the Kharung River so that the water flowing in the river can be stopped and the same can be utilized by the nearby agriculturists for irrigation purposes and to ensure ground water recharge in the particular area. It is further submitted that the stop dam / anicut caters 3 irrigational heads of 40 hectares of agricultural lands. d. It is respectfully submitted that pursuant to the sanction order, the stop dam was constructed and the construction of the said stop dam /anicut was completed in the year 2015. A copy of the completion certificate of the stop dam / anicut and copies of latest photographs is being filed herewith as Annexure A/2 colly. It is respectfully submitted that the stop dam / anicut which was constructed and commenced in the year 2015 has been catering the desired needs of the local agriculturists and is still in a proper condition. e. That, the Mohra (Hardideeh) anicut is not an "anicut cum causeway" and is purely an "Anicut/Stop Dam". In any "anicut cum causeway" there is a provision of passage above the same so that the same can be utilized by the local residents as way, however, in anicut / stop dam, there is no such provision. The present project is purely an anicut and hence, there is no provision of passage or road over it. f. It is necessary to mention that in the original project, there was a proposal for construction of approach road from the anicut to the main road which passes through the village Hardideeh which is merely 250 meter away from the anicut. However, the local agriculturists did not 5 agree to provide their land for construction of approach road as tube wells were installed in the said area and this was the reason, the approach road could not be constructed. It is respectfully submitted that there is another alternative route available for the villagers of village Hardideeh. g. That, the deponent respectfully submits that since the original project is not an "anicut cum causeway" and is purely an anicut / stop dam in which there is no provision of such passage and further the said project has been completed way back in the year 2015 and the construction of said anicut / stop dam is serving the purpose for which it was constructed. 5. That, the deponent respectfully submits that he is a law abiding person and holds the highest regards and great respect for the orders and directions of the Hon'ble Court. He is duty bound to abide by and auhere to the order and direction of this Hon'ble Court. 6. That, the contents of this affidavit have been drafted according to my instructions and the contents thereof are true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge and belief, based on the official records. 3. From perusal of the aforesaid affidavit, it transpires that the stop dam/anicut over the Kharung River at village Mohra (Hardideeh), Block Belha, was duly sanctioned and completed in the year 2015 and the same is serving the purpose for which it was constructed, including irrigation of nearby agricultural lands and recharge of groundwater. It has further been clarified that the said project is purely an anicut/stop dam and not an anicut-cum- 6 causeway, therefore, no provision for passage or road over the structure was contemplated. The non-construction of the proposed approach road has also been explained on account of non- availability of land due to objection of local agriculturists, with an alternative route being available for the villagers. That, the present Public Interest Litigation has been registered by the Hon'ble Court taking suo moto cognizance of the news item published in daily newspaper "Navbharat" dated 18/01/2026 titled as "12 Salo Me Nahi Ban Saka Stop Dam, Sadak Se Bhi Nahi Joda Ja Saka." In the said news item, it has been stated that the stop dam sanctioned over the Kharung River (wrongly mentioned as Kharun in the news item) was sanctioned in the year 2013-14, however, the said construction of stop dam is of no use to the public at large and further it is not serving the purpose for which it was constructed. 4. In view of the aforesaid explanation furnished on fresh affidavit and the material placed on record, no further cause survives for consideration in the present Public Interest Litigation, therefore, the Petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Priya