1 2026:CGHC:26832 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1229 of 2022 1 - Suresh Agrawal S/o Shri R.K. Agrawal Aged About 57 Years R/o Ramniwas Talkies Road, Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh, Civil And Revenue District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Collector, Raigarh, Distirict Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Nayab Tahsildar, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Dr. Arham Siddiqui, Panel Lawyer. RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 01/07/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for the entire records of the petitioner's case from the court below. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may be further pleased to quash the impugned order dated 12.11.2021 (Ann.P/1) passed by the Collector, Raigarh as it is not according to the law and remand the case for grant of land to the petitioner in exchange as per order dated 08.09.2021 (Ann.P/12) and report submitted by concerned Patwari. 10.3 Any other order that the Hon'ble Court deems fit and necessary in the circumstances of the case be also passed. 10.4 That the cost of the petition be also awarded to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, pursuant to the order/recommendation dated 23.09.2021 passed by the Sub- Divisional Officer (Revenue), Raigarh, the competent authority recorded a finding that the petitioner was entitled to be allotted 0.32 acres of Government land in exchange for the land already acquired by the State Government. It was further observed that 3 the petitioner could obtain the said land by submitting an appropriate application before the competent authority. Learned counsel further submits that, apart from the aforesaid 0.32 acres, an additional 0.283 hectare of land belonging to the petitioner has also been proposed to be acquired by the State Government. It is, therefore, contended that the petitioner is also entitled to be allotted Government land in exchange for the said proposed acquisition. It is further submitted that the Collector, Raigarh, by order dated 12.11.2021, accepted the petitioner's claim to the extent of allotment of 0.32 acres of land situated at Village Parsad, District Raigarh, in lieu of the land already acquired by the State Government for construction of the road. However, insofar as the remaining 0.283 hectare of land, which is only proposed to be acquired, is concerned, the Collector rejected the petitioner's claim for exchange of land. 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the land in respect of which the petitioner is seeking allotment of Government land in exchange has not yet been acquired. It is submitted that only a proposal for acquisition has been initiated and that no final decision has yet been taken, nor have acquisition proceedings been commenced or concluded in accordance with law. Therefore, unless the acquisition proceedings are finalized and the petitioner's land is actually acquired by the State Government, no right accrues in favour of the petitioner to seek allotment of Government land in exchange. It is, thus, contended 4 that the order passed by the Collector, Raigarh is perfectly legal, justified and does not warrant any interference by this Court. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Upon perusal of the record, it is evident that the petitioner's claim relating to 0.32 acres of land, which has already been acquired by the State Government for the purpose of construction of a road, has duly been considered by the competent authorities. Accordingly, the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Raigarh, as well as the Collector, Raigarh, have passed appropriate orders permitting the petitioner to obtain Government land in exchange for the land already acquired. However, so far as the remaining 0.283 hectare of land is concerned, the same has not yet been acquired and is only the subject matter of a proposal for future acquisition. In the absence of any concluded acquisition proceedings, the petitioner cannot claim exchange of Government land as a matter of right. Consequently, the competent authorities have rightly declined to grant the relief sought in respect of the said land, and the impugned order to that extent does not call for any interference by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. It is, however, made clear that as and when acquisition proceedings in respect of the remaining 0.283 hectare of land are initiated and concluded in accordance with law, and the petitioner's land is acquired by the State Government after following the prescribed procedure, including issuance of the requisite statutory notices, 5 the petitioner shall be at liberty to claim all consequential benefits, including compensation or such other reliefs as may be available to him under the applicable statutory provisions and Government policy. 6. With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat