Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 33017 (CHH)

VIKAS v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/4256/2026 · 2026-08-13

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010311862026 2026:CGHC:36241 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4256 of 2026 1 - Vikas S/o Rameshwar Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 2 - Akadashiya S/o Ramdayal Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 3 - Shivnandan Mali S/o Late Badal Mali Aged About 56 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 4 - Nikhad S/o Late Gopal Aged About 56 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 5 - Ghurau Ram Mali S/o Late Kanan Prasad Mali Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 6 - Jagram Marar S/o Late Bhagau Aged About 74 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 7 - Firat S/o Khudhahu Nishad, Aged About 78 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 8 - Bedu Ram S/o Data Ram Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 9 - Bhoj Ram S/o Chheduram Aged About 67 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh SHYNA AJAY Digitally signed by SHYNA AJAY Date: 2026.08.18 16:34:54 +0530 2 10 - Mahettar S/o Late Chamara Aged About 80 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 11 - Asharam S/o Late Rajaram Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 12 - Rohit Kumar Mali S/o Late Seva Ram Mali Aged About 64 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 13 - Loknath S/o Ransay Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 14 - Shaukilal Sidar S/o Darsh Ram Sidar Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 15 - Sudarshan S/o Holi Marar Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 16 - Surati Lal Sahu S/o Gahsiya Ram Sahu Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Sakrali, Tehsil Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Secretary Department Of Water Resource, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Secretary Department Of Finance, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Collector Sakti District Sakti Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh 3 6 - Engineer In Chief Shivnath Bhawan North Block Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 7 - Chief Engineer Water Resource Department, Minimata (Hasdev) Bango Pariyojna Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 8 - Executive Engineer Water Resource Survey And Bairaj Construction Division No. 1, Kharsiya, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pranjal Agarwal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. SS Choubey, Government Advocate S B: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 14/08/2026 1. With consent of learned counsel for both the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. Petitioners have preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking direction to respondent No. 5/Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue)-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, Dabhara, Distt. Sakti (CG) to decide the representation/application (Annexure P- 2) dated 4-1-2024 filed by them under Section 73 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement. Act, 2013 (henceforth, referred as ‘Act of 2013’). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, petitioners’ land bearing different Khasra Numbers as mentioned below has been 4 acquired for construction of Saradih Bairag over Mahanadi, in Land Acquisition Case No. 29/A-82/2012-13 and the award dated 31-3-2017 has been passed by respondent No. 5 : Serial No. Name of the Petitioners Khasra Nos. 1 Vikas 1873, 1893 admeasuring area 0.206, 0.129 hectare 2. Akadashiya 955/4 admeasuring area 0.121 hectare 3 Shivnandan Mali 1891 admeasuring area 0.316 hectare 4 Nikhad 1898 admeasuring area 0.121 hectare 5 Ghurau Ram Mali 1100, 1913 admeasuring area 0.745, 0.040 hectare 6. Jagram Marar 1001/5 admeasuring area 0.040 hectare 7 Firat 2124/2, 2127/2 admeasuring area 0.008, 0.061 hectare 8 Bedu Ram 2108 admeasuring area 0.214 hectare 9. Bhoj Ram 1096, 1915, 2069 admeasuring area 0.065, 0.061, 0.227 hectare 10 Mahettar 838/2 admeasuring area 0.040 hectare 11 Asharam 1906 admeasuring area 0.121 hectare 12 Rohit Kumar Mali 1900, 1913 5 admeasuring area 0.105, 0.166 hectare 13 Loknath 2107, 2131/3, 2131/4, 2132/1 admeasuring area 0.081, 0.016, 0.016, 0.053 hectare 14 Shaukilal Sidar 1863/5 admeasuring area 0.020 hectare 15 Sudarshan 1885 admeasuring area 0.275 hectare 16 Surati Lal Sahu 1428/2, 1867/1 admeasuring area 0.384, 0.020 hectare 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are aggrieved from the amount of compensation determined by respondent No. 5, therefore, they have not received compensation amount yet. He further submits that, for redressal of their grievance, petitioners have filed the representation dated 4-1-2024 (Annexure P-2) under Section 73 of the Act of 2013, before respondent No. 5, but the same has not been considered and decided yet, therefore, this petition may be disposed of directing respondent No. 5 to decide their representation Annexure P-2. 5. Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State submits that he has no objection to allow the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 6. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having regard to 6 the facts of the case, particularly considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners, this petition is disposed of directing respondent No. 5/Land Acquisition Officer-Cum-Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Dabhara, Distt. Sakti (CG) to decide the representation/application (Annexure P-2) filed by the petitioners under Section 73 of the Act of 2013 expeditiously, preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt / submission of copy of this order, in accordance with law, taking into consideration the judgment dated 3- 10-2024 passed by learned Division Bench of this Court in FAM No. 1/2023 [State of Chhattisgarh Vs. (Died), Smt. Padum Kunwar and others] and other connected matters. 8. This petition is accordingly disposed of at motion stage. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Shyna Ajay