Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 30709 (CHH)

VIJAY KUMAR GIRI v. SHRI MANOJ PARGANIYA

CONT/469/2026 · 2026-08-19

Shri Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010130492026 2026:CGHC:37355 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 469 of 2026 1 - Vijay Kumar Giri S/o Late Hari Mangal Giri Aged About 62 Years R/o D-8 Pension Bada, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Bharat Bhushan Giri S/o Late Hari Mangal Giri Aged About 55 Years R/o D-8, Pension Bada Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Rakesh Kumar Giri S/o Late Hari Mangal Giri Aged About 44 Years R/o D-8, Pension Bada Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Sohagi Bai W/o Derha Ram Angare Aged About 72 Years R/o 27, Kholi Vikas Nagar, Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicants versus 1 - Shri Manoj Parganiya Project Director National Highway Authority Of India Project Execution Unit Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Manish Sahu Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title, as taken from CIS) For applicants : Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate. For Respondent No. 1 For Respondent No. 2 : : Mr. Dheeraj Wankhede, Advocate. Mr. Shailja Shukla, Advocate. Applicant No. 1- Vijay Kumar Giri is present in person. In compliance of this Court’s order dated 13.8.2026, respondent No. 2 – Manish Sahu, S.D.O. (Revenue) Bilaspur, is also present in person . 2 {Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi} Order on Board 20/08/2026 1. Alleging that the respondents have not complied with the orders and directions issued by this court in W.P. (C) No.1264/2025 dated 7.3.2025, the applicants /complainant is before this court in this contempt petition. 2. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 would submit that in pursuance of the order under contempt dated 7.3.2025, spot inspection has been carried out and the lands available to the applicants have been shown to them. 3. Aforesaid fact has also conceded by counsel for the applicants. 4. In view of the fact that respondent No. 2 has complied with the order under contempt dated 7.3.2025, I do not find any reason to proceed further in the matter initiating contempt proceeding against the respondents. 5. Accordingly, the rule is discharged and contempt proceeding is dropped. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2026.08.21 16:39:11 +0530