CAPITAL INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
WPC/4435/2022 · 2026-07-23
Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 29119 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 29119 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
CGHC010316502022
2026:CGHC:31781
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4435 of 2022 Capital Infra Private Limited Through Its Director (Present Director) Jitendra Goyal S/o Ratanlal Goyal Age 53 Years, Registered Office 412, Pushpak Apartment, Chotapara, Raipur, Tahsil Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Naya Mantralaya Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer Abhanpur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 4 - National Highway Authority Through Project Director, Project Execution Unit Shanker Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)
... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Sharma, Advocate For Respective Respondents : Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocate and Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, P.L.
HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMITENDRA KISHORE PRASAD
ORDER ON BOARD 24/07/2026
2
1. After arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be granted liberty to file an application under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act before the concerned Commissioner.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective respondents has no objection if such liberty is granted to the petitioner.
3. Accordingly, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file an appropriate application under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act before the concerned Commissioner.
4. The concerned Commissioner, before whom the application under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act is filed, shall take into
consideration the fact that the petitioner had filed the present petition on 19.10.2022 and that the matter has remained pending before this Court. While considering the question of limitation, the Commissioner shall take the aforesaid fact into account, notwithstanding the outer limit of one year prescribed under the Act.
5. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
JUDGE Saurabh