1 CGHC010268262022 2026:CGHC:30891 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3646 of 2022 Chandrabhushan Mahto S/o Late Kapil Narayan Mahto Aged About 56 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist. Korba Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, General Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Dist Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Colletor Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer Cum Land Acquisition Officer Korba Dist. Korba Chhattisgarh 4 - The Tehsildar Tehsil Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 5 - Ramkewal S/o Late Deendayal Aged About 68 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali, Tahsil And Post Barpali, Dist. Korba Chhattisgarh 6 - Bhagirathi S/o Late Deendayal Aged About 63 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 7 - Bharatlal S/o Late Deendayal Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 8 - Ashwani Kumar S/o Late Deendayal Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 9 - Saraju Prasad S/o Late Deendayal Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.07.22 10:10:48 +0530 2 10 - Santosh Kumar S/o Late Chandrika Prasad Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 11 - Smt. Ganesh Devi W/o Late Chandrika Prasad Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 12 - Kailash Kumar S/o Late Chandrika Prasad Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 13 - Harishankar S/o Late Kapilnarayan Aged About 63 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 14 - Mahendra Kumar S/o Late Kapilnarayan Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 15 - Thakureshwar Prasad S/o Late Kapilnarayan Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 16 - Shatruhan Prasad S/o Late Kamta Prasad Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 17 - Smt. Sanju (Widow) D/o Late Kamta Prasad Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh 18 - Vagis @ Vasu S/o Late Madhusudan Mother Name Smt. Sanju, R/o Village Salihabhata, Barpali Tehsil And Post Barpali, Dist Korba Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Basant Dewangan, Advocate For State : Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. G.A. 3 Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 21.07.2026 1. By filing the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in not considering the petitioner's claim for partition and mutation on the basis of the family settlement dated 05.09.2019 and has further sought a direction for disbursement of the compensation amount in respect of the acquired land bearing Khasra No.696/1, situated at Village Barpali, District Korba, in accordance with the shares of the petitioner and the private respondents. The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s) :- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ thereby directing the respondent authorities to consider the application of the petitioner for partition and mutation as per the family settlement arrived between the petitioner and respondent no.5 to 18, and in alternative the respondent authorities may kindly be directed pass an award of land acquired of khasra no.696/1, Village Barpali, Dist- Korba C.G, in the name of parties according to their shares/ownership possession over the land bearing khasra по.696/1, Village Barpali, Dist- Korba C.G, as per the family settlement dated 05.09.2019. 4 10.2 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ thereby directing the respondent authorities to take cognizance on the application of the petitioner in an expedited manner. 10.3 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in favour of the petitioners may kindly be passed.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 to 18 are descendants of late Baijnath Mahto and claim to be joint owners of the land in question. According to the petitioner, though the property was partitioned amongst the family members by way of a family settlement dated 05.09.2019, the mutation could not be effected. In the meantime, the land came to be acquired for the National Highway Authority of India. It is the petitioner's case that despite the family settlement and repeated representations submitted before the authorities, no appropriate action has been taken for recognizing the respective shares of the parties while dealing with the compensation payable for the acquired land. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, along with respondent Nos.5 to 18, is a joint owner of the land in question and all of them are entitled to the compensation awarded by the competent Land Acquisition Officer. He submits that, on account of certain disputes between the petitioner and the private respondents, the compensation amount has not been disbursed. 5 It is further submitted that the dispute has since been amicably settled amongst the parties through a family settlement and, therefore, the respondent authorities ought to consider the claim of the petitioner and disburse the compensation in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that no document has been brought on record to establish that any award has been passed in respect of the acquired land or that the compensation amount is lying undisbursed on account of the alleged dispute. It is, therefore, submitted that in the absence of such foundational documents, no relief, as prayed for, can be granted in the present writ petition. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. From a perusal of the record, it transpires that except making a bald assertion that the land in question has been acquired and that the compensation has not been disbursed on account of the dispute between the parties, the petitioner has not placed on record any document to demonstrate that an award has in fact been passed by the competent Land Acquisition Officer or that the compensation amount is payable and has been withheld. Likewise, no material has been filed to substantiate the petitioner's claim regarding the stage of the acquisition 6 proceedings or the alleged entitlement to compensation in terms of the family settlement. 7. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that in the absence of any documentary material evidencing the award of compensation or the petitioner's entitlement thereto, no direction as sought for can be issued in exercise of writ jurisdiction. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition, being devoid of merit, deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh