1 / 3 2026:CGHC:4966 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 592 of 2017 Bhagat Ram Chauhan S/o Baisakhu Chauhan, Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Teram, Tahsil Gharghoda, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector (Land Acquisition Officer) Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Gharghoda, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Engineer S E C R, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. M.K. Jaiswal, Advocate For Resp. No. 1 & 2/State : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Dy. Advocate General For Resp. No.3/Union of India : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Dy. Solicitor General S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 29/01/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs: Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2026.02.02 11:10:38 +0530 2 / 3 “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly call for the entire record in relates to the case of the petitioner, 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issued a writ or writs/order/or orders to direct the respondents authorities to grant the compensation to the petitioner. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issued a writ or writs/order/or orders to direct the respondents authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P/6), within a period of two months. 10.4 Any other relief, which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be allowed.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was granted the land when he was discharging duty of Kotwar bearing kh. no.757/1101, 757, 118, 119, 120/9 admeasuring 0.579, 0.178, 1.015, 0.372 hectare under bhumi-swami rights and patta. Land of petitioner was used by respondent No.3 at the time of laying down new railway line. He contended that though land has been recorded in name of petitioner, however, no alternate land has been provided nor any compensation is paid. Petitioner thereafter had submitted representation before respondents No. 1 & 3 on 02.04.2016 but till date representation submitted by petitioner has not been considered and decided. Therefore a direction be issued to concerned respondent to take decision on representation in accordance with law within specified time. 3 / 3 3. Learned counsel for the respondent -State submits that representation which is referred by petitioner and enclosed along with writ petition is of the year 2016. They submit that in view of grievance raised, if petitioner submits fresh representation it will be considered and decided in accordance with law. 4. On due consideration of submission of learned counsel for the respective parties, considering that grievance of petitioner is with regard to compensation against the land recorded in his name which was being used for purpose of laying down railway line and petitioner has earlier submitted representation, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage permitting the petitioner to submit comprehensive representation before respondents No. 1 to 3 along with all relevant documents and in the event petitioner submits representation, concerned authority shall take decision on the representation to be submitted by petitioner within a further period of 6 months from the date of receipt of representation. The respondent No.2 shall conduct demarcation to ascertain whether land of petitioner is also used by the other respondent for laying railway line or it is marked as railway area. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen