1 / 4 2026:CGHC:24809 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2120 of 2021 Gurmel Singh Saini S/o Late Gurucharan Singh Saini Aged About 58 Years R/o In Front Of Vijaya Bank, Shyam Nagar, Telebandha, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Works Department Mantralay, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Officer And Land Acquisition Officer Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department Division No. 3, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2026.06.22 14:48:33 +0530 2 / 4 For Petitioner : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For State : Mr. Rajkumar Sahu, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 18/06/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs : “1 To quash and set aside memorandum dated 05/10/2020 and order dated 04/09/2020. 2. To direct the respondent authorities to return the unused land of the petitioner, which was acquired. 3. Any other relief which the Hon'ble court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner and the cost of the petition may awarded in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has purchased the land bearing kh. no. 412 and 423/1 admeasuring 0.223 hectares and 0.648 hectares respectively from Rohit Kumar, Urmila Bai, Rohini Bai, Johtarin Bai, Johani Bai, Bisahin and Leela Bai by registered sale deed dated 01.04.2007. He contended that land purchased by petitioner, though subject matter of land acquisition proceeding in Land Acquisition Case No.32/A/1982 Year-2005-06, was acquired by the award dated 19.03.2007, however, land has not been used for any purpose and therefore petitioner being purchaser of land has submitted an application for return of un-used land which was rejected only on the ground that there is no provision under the Land Acquisition Act to return back the un-used land. 3 / 4 3. Learned counsel for the State would oppose the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and would submit that from the document Annexure P-3 filed along with writ petition it is apparent that land was recorded in the names of Rohit Kumar, Urmila Bai, Rohini Bai, Johtarin Bai, Johani Bai, Bisahin and Leela Bai was subject matter of acquisition proceeding of the year 2005-06 and the award with respect to land subject matter of this writ petition along with other land has been passed on 19.03.2007. On the date of passing of award of the land subject matter of writ petition bearing kh. No.412 and 423/1 along with other land, petitioner was not the owner of land because petitioner has not purchased the land prior to issuance of notification for acquisition or passing of award. From the date as mentioned in Annexure P-3 and document enclosed with writ petition Annexure P-4 i.e. copy of registered sale deed it is apparent that petitioner has purchased the land only on 01.04.2007 i.e after passing of award. He also referred to memo issued to petitioner mentioning that claim of petitioner has been rejected on the ground that petitioner was not the registered owner of the land on the date of initiation of acquisition proceeding or passing of award and therefore no relief as prayed for can be granted to petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexure along with this writ petition. 5. Perusal of the proceeding recorded by Land Acquisition Officer Annexure P-3 dated 04.09.2020 would show that land acquisition proceeding was initiated in the year 2005-06 for acquisition of land including land bearing kh. no.412 , 423/1 . It also clearly mentions that 4 / 4 land were owned by Rohit Kumar, Urmila, Rohini Bai, Johtarin Bai, Johni, Bisahi, the legal heirs of Lachhi. Acquisition proceeding was concluded by passing an award dated 19.03.2007. This fact as mentioned in Annexure P-3 is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. Claim of petitioner is that petitioner has purchased the land through registered sale deed dated 01.04.2007 and therefore he became owner of subject land. As the petitioner was not recorded owner of the land or was not having any right over the land bearing kh. no.412, 423/1 on the date of initiation of acquisition proceeding or passing of award, therefore, in the opinion of this Court, petitioner will not be permitted to claim for return of land and is not entitled for any relief as prayed for in this writ petition. Proceeding Annexure P-3 was forwarded to Collector and the Collector observing aforementioned facts as discussed in preceding paragraph of the order had rightly rejected the claim of petitioner on the ground that petitioner was not the owner of the land on the date of initiation of acquisition proceeding or passing of award. 7. I do not find any error in the decision taken by respondent calling interference in the impugned order. 8. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition being devoid of substance is liable to be and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen