1 CGHC010429552025 2026:CGHC:38227 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 1570 of 2025 Manmera Gond S/o Lt Shri Jatru Gond Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Mudhipar, Near Mudhipar Toll Plaza Tehsil- Bodri District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - Kangale Reena Babasaheb Secretary Revenue And Disaster Management And Rehabilitation Department Indravati Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Manish Sahu The Sub Divisional Officer, Revenue Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - D.D. Parlawar Project Director National Highway Authority Of India, Project Implementing Unit, Abhilasha Parisar, Tifra, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondents/Contemnors For Petitioner : Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Advocate. For Respondent No. 2 For Respondent No. 3 : : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Advocate. Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocate ( Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 25/08/2026 1. Alleging that the respondents have not complied with the orders and directions issued by this court in W.P. (C) No. 1021 of 2022 dated 2 31.01.2025, the applicants /complainant is before this court in this contempt petition. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant / complainant submits that in compliance of order under contempt dated 31.01.2025 passed by this Court in WPC No. 1021 of 2022 (Shri Manmera Gond vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others), demarcation of the subject land of the applicant has been carried out. Upon such demarcation, it was found that the applicant's land has been affected on account of the construction of the said by-pass road by the National Highways Authority. He further submits that necessary steps has been taken by the National Highway Authority of India vide Annexure A-8 dated 07.04.2025 by communicating respondent No. 2 to do the needful for acquisition of the subject land, so that the same may be duly acquired and appropriate compensation may be paid to the applicant in accordance with law. 3. Aforesaid facts have also been conceded by learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 2 and 3. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. In this regard, paragraph 5 of Annexure A-8, dated 07.04.2026, is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference: “5. NH Act 1956 ds rgr~ Hkwfe vf/kxzgz.k dh dk;Zokgh Hkwfejkf’k iksVZy ds ek/;e ls l{ke izkf/kdkjh ¼Hkw&vtZu½ ds Lrj ij 3,@3 Mh uksfVfQds’ku mijkar izHkkfor fgrc) Hkw&/kkjdksa dk eqvkotk forj.k Hkwfejkf’k iksVZy ds ek/;e ls l{ke izkf/kdkjh ¼Hkw&vtZu½ }kjk fd;k tkuk gS A vr% xzke&eq<hikj Hkwfe [k-ua- 411 ,oa 451@5 dk ekSdk vuqlkj izHkkfor Hkwfe dk NH Act 1956 ds rgr~ Hkw&vtZu dh dkjZokbZ djus d"V djsa A” 6. In view of the aforesaid paragraph 5 of Annexure A-8, respondent No. 2 is directed to initiate the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the subject 3 land under the National Highways Act, 1956 and in compliance thereof, respondent No. 3/NHAI shall ensure payment of the compensation payable to the applicant expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from today, in accordance with law. 7. In view of above, I do not find any reason to proceed further in the matter initiating contempt proceeding against the respondents. 8. 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: 2026.08.31 16:49:20 +0530