1 CGHC010388682023 2026:CGHC:28798 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4977 of 2023 Judgment Reserved On : 01.07.2026. Judgment Delivered On : 10.07.2026. 1 - Krishna Kumar Kashyap S/o Late Shri Kunjram Kashyap Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Ghivra, Police Station Birra, District Sakti (C.G.) 2 - Smt. Shashi Kashyap W/o Ishwar Prasad Kashyap Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Ghivra, Police Station Birra, District Sakti (C.G.) 3 - Smt. Sarita Kashyap W/o Govindram Kashyap Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Jamdi, Police Station Hasaud, District Sakti (C.G.) 4 - Smt. Ritu Kashyap W/o Sakhiram Kashyap Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Singhul, Police Station Sivrinarayan, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 5 - Hirdebai Wd/o Late Shri Kunjram Kashyap Aged About 70 Years R/o Village Ghivra, Police Station Birra, District Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 3 - The Sdo(R) And Land Acquisition Officer Sakti District Sakti/janjgir, Champa (C.G.) 4 - The Executive Engineer, Hasdev Canal Water Management Division, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Avadhesh Mishra, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Shri Anadi Sharma, Panel Lawyer. AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2026.07.10 18:16:04 +0530 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad C A V Order 1. The present Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue suitable writ for Respondent Authorities to release separately or collectively the compensation of said acquired land bearing Khasra no. 1846 situated at village Ghivra Patwari Halka No. 27 Tahsil Jaijaipur (C.G.) to petitioners within stipulated time. 10.2 That, any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost may also be allowed. 2. Gist of the facts is that the land of the petitioners was acquired by respondent authorities for the construction of canal 35 years ago but when the compensation had not been paid for a long time, the father/husband of petitioners approached this Court vide WPC No. 1519/2019 in which, this Court directed respondent no. 2/ Collector Janjgir Champa (C.G.) to decide the representation of the petitioner in respect of land acquisition within a period of 60 days. Ultimately, Collector Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in compliance of order of this Court called the record of acquired land of petitioner from the office of The Executive Engineer Hasdev Canal Water Management Division Janjgir Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) and thereafter registered the additional land acquisition case of petitioner vide proceeding dated 25.04.2020. As per said proceeding dated 25.4.2020, SDO (R) and Land Acquisition Officer Sakti initiated the said case of petitioner vide order sheet dated 19.5.2020, 11.6.2020, 3.7.2020, 14.1.2021, 18.1.2021. Thereafter, when the respondent in pursuant to aforesaid order of this Court could not decide the 3 representation of petitioner within 60 days, the respondents authorities filed MCC no. 144/2021 on 16.2.2021 before this Court for extension of time for compliance of the order dated 29.4.2019 passed by Court in WPC No. 1519/2019. The said MCC was disposed off on 05.05.2023. In the meanwhile on 18.3.2021, the SDO (R) and Land Acquisition Officer Sakti issued the calculation process of land in favour of father/husband of petitioner bearing Khasra no. 1846 as total amount of Rs. 13,44,540/-. Thereafter on 27.3.2021 the respondent no. 2 issued a proposal dated 27.03.2021 for purchase of land in favour of father/husband of petitioner vide Annexure P/7. On 02.05.2021, unfortunately the father/husband of petitioner died leaving behind legal representative petitioner no. 1 to 5. On the basis of death of father/husband of petitioner, all the revenue records of the petitioner including above said Khasra no. 1846 was altered by lawful mutation in the name of all his legal heirs i.e. petitioner no. 1 to 5. Thereafter again in the name of legal representatives i.e. Petitioners nos. 1 to 5, the SDO (R) and Land Acquisition Officer Sakti issued the calculation process of said acquired land for further action of the Collector Janjgir-Champa vide order dated 25.9.2021. Thereafter, on 28.10.2021, Collector Janjgir Champa issued an order and a proposal for purchase of land of petitioners vide Annexure P/11. Thereafter, the SDO (R) and Land Acquisition Officer Sakti issued the order sheet for issuing public notice to the Collector Janjgir-Champa vide its revenue order sheet dated 28.12.2021 along with consent deed dated 29.11.2021. Thereafter, the respondent Collector Janjgir- Champa issued the public notice in respects of purchasing of said land of petitioner no. 1 to 5 vide its letter dated 02.02.2022. Thereafter, the SDO (R) and Land 4 Acquisition Officer Sakti arbitrary once again called the record of the said case from respondent the Collector Janjgir Champa even after issuing public notice in respects of purchasing of said land and passed its illegal opinion vide order sheet dated 20.5.2022 (Annexure P/1). After receiving of said illegal opinion, the respondent learned Collector Janjgir- Champa dismissed the said land acquisition proceeding improperly by returning such case to the SDO (R) and Land Acquisition Officer Sakti vide its order dated 06.07.2022 (Annexure P/1) instead of releasing the compensation of said land. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that 0.28 acre land of petitioners from Khasara No. 1846 total Rakba 0.33 acre was acquired by respondent authorities 35 years ago, however, the same was acquired in two steps first 0.16 acre and thereafter 0.12 acre i.e. (0.16 + 0.12 = 0.28 acre) but the compensation of the same separately or collectively has not yet been released. He submits that as per the available record / impugned order Annexure P-1, it has been stated by the concerned respondent authority that only 0.16 acre of land of petitioners has been determined and award of compensation of the same has been passed but compensation is not released till date. It has been further stated by the impugned order that remaining 0.12 acre acquired land of petitioners will be reported for determination separately, however, the said process has not been done. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is crystal clear from the record available that the said land of the petitioners (0.16 + 0.12 = 0.28 acre) was acquired for the construction of canal and the compensation is determined collectively and even the public notice for purchasing the said land was issued but thereafter instead of releasing compensation, 5 respondent authority Collector Distt. Janjgir-Champa C.G. committed illegal tactics by returning such case to respondent SDO (R) and Land Acquisition Officer Sakti. Learned counsel further submits that no compensation of the above acquired land of petitioners is given separately or collectively till date. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State/respondent submits that petitioners have come before this Court by way of this Petition seeking grant of compensation with respect to Khasra No, 1846, however, it is submitted that vide order dated 20.05.2022 and 06.07.2022, the revenue case of the petitioners has been dismissed clearly observing therein that 0.16 acres out of total .33 acres has been acquired by the respondents and on that acquired . 16 acres, the Canal has been constructed. It has been further observed that the remaining land out of total has not been used by the respondent authorities and the same is being used by the petitioners for agricultural purposes. Since, the respondents are not in need of the remaining land, the same has not been acquired. Learned State counsel would place reliance on the memorandum dated 03.03.2025 (Annexure R/2) issued by the Sub- Divisional Officer, Janjgir whereunder, it has been stated that for the construction of Birra sub-distributor canal, 0.16 acre of land from Khasra No. 1846 of village Ghivra has been acquired in the year 1979-80 by passing an order under mutual agreement and compensation of Rs. 264.00 (two hundred sixty four rupees only) for Khasra No. 1846 area 0.16 acre is registered in the name of landowner Nanki father Vishwanath. 6. Learned State counsel submits that it has been further stated that on February 27, 2025, an on-site inspection of the above-mentioned land was conducted. The Birra Sub-Distributor Canal has been constructed on 0.16 6 acres of land in Khasra No. 1846 of village Dhivara, Tehsil Hasaud. The remaining land is being cultivated by the respective landowner/petitioners herein. Therefore, the Birra sub-distributary canal has not been constructed on an additional 0.12 acres of land from Khasra No. 1846 in village Ghivra, Tehsil Hasaud. Hence, the proposed 0.12 acres of land from Khasra No. 1846 is not required to be acquired for the canal construction. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the petition carefully. 8. From the material available on record, it is evident that only 0.16 acre of land out of Khasra No. 1846 was acquired for the construction of Birra Sub- Distributor Canal. The respondents have specifically stated that the canal has been constructed only over the said acquired land and that the remaining .12 acre land continues to be in possession of the petitioners and is being used for agricultural purposes. The memorandum dated 03.03.2025 and the spot inspection report further support the stand of the respondents that no additional area measuring 0.12 acre was acquired or utilized for canal construction. 9. Further, in the memorandum dated 03.03.2025, it has been specifically stated that for construction of Birra sub-distributor canal, 0.16 acre of land from Khasra No. 1846 of village Ghivra has been acquired in the year 1979- 80 by passing an order under mutual agreement and compensation of Rs. 264.00 (two hundred sixty four rupees only) for Khasra No. 1846 area 0.16 acre is registered in the name of landowner Nanki father Vishwanath. The said memorandum has been passed by the revenue authorities based on report dated 27.02.2025, which has not been disputed by the petitioner in any 7 way. Insofar as the acquired land measuring 0.16 acre is concerned, the respondents have produced material indicating that compensation was determined in the name of Nanki at the relevant time and has been received by the petitioners. 10.For the foregoing, this Court, in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, does not find any arbitrariness, illegality, or perversity in the impugned orders warranting interference. The findings recorded by the competent authorities are based on the available revenue records and the spot inspection, and no ground has been made out to exercise writ jurisdiction. 11.Consequently, the writ petition, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Avinash The date when the judgment is reserved The date when the judgment is pronounced The date when the judgment is uploaded on the website Operative Full 01.07.2026 10.07.2026 ------ 10.07.2026