1 CGHC010327302026 2026:CGHC:37772 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4375 of 2026 1 - The Gas Authority Of India Limited (Gail India Limited) Through The General Manager, Camp Office, Second Floor, Forum Business Center, Bhatagaon, Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. 2 - The Gas Authority Of India Limited (G A I L India Limited) Through The Competent Authority, Camp Office, Second Floor, Forum Business Center, Bhatagaon, Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. 3 - Shri A. Suresh Babu S/o Shri A. Malakondaia, Aged About 54 Years Posted As General Manager At O/o The Gas Authority Of India Limited (G A I L India Limited) Camp Office, Second Floor, Forum Business Center, Bhatagaon, Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. 4 - Smt. Ritu Hemnani W/o Rajkumar Hemnani, Aged About 56 Years Posted As Joint Collector Cum Competent Authority At O/o The Gas Authority Of India Limited (G A I L India Limited) Camp Office, Second Floor, Forum Business Center, Bhatagaon, Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. ... Petitioners Versus 1 - The Chhattisgarh State Women Commission Through Its President, Near Office Of Election Commission Of India, Shastri Chowk, District Raipur, C.G. 2 - The State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Women And Child Welfare, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, C.G. RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU Date: 2026.09.02 13:45:12 +0530 2 3 - Amrit Bai Patel Wd/o Late Shri Amar Singh Patel, Aged About 74 Years R/o Village Nawapara, Post Kachhar, Tahsil Kharsia, District Raigarh, C.G. ... Respondents (Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.) For Petitioner : Mr. Sandeep Dubey, Advocate. For Respective Respondent: Mr. Ashutosh Singh Kachhawaha, Advocate. For State : Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, Dy. A.G. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 24/08/2026 1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court kindly may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/writs in the nature of certiorari, and quash the orders dated order dated 19.06.2025, 06.07.2026 and 08.07.2026 passed by the Respondent No. 1/Chhattisgarh State Women Commission in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant any other relief(s) which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Brief facts of the case, as adumbrated by the petitioner, are that the petitioner-GAIL India Limited has challenged the proceedings and directions issued by the Chhattisgarh State Women Commission in relation to the acquisition of the Right of User over the land belonging to Respondent No. 3 under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962. The grievance of the petitioner is that, after completion of the 3 statutory acquisition proceedings and determination of compensation by the competent authority, the Women Commission, which has no adjudicatory jurisdiction over such proceedings, issued directions for enhancement/payment of compensation, threatened initiation of criminal and civil proceedings against the petitioner's officers, and directed that possession of the land not be handed over to GAIL. The petitioner contends that such directions are without jurisdiction, contrary to the statutory scheme of the P&MP Act, 1962, and beyond the limited advisory and recommendatory functions vested in the Commission under the M.P. Rajya Mahila Ayog Adhiniyam, 1995, as adopted by the State of Chhattisgarh. Accordingly, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of the proceedings and orders passed by the Chhattisgarh State Women Commission. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Chhattisgarh State Women Commission, Raipur (C.G.), has, without any authority of law and in excess of its jurisdiction, passed the impugned order directing the petitioner-company to pay an enhanced amount of compensation, to compensate respondent No. 6 for the alleged loss suffered by her, and to lodge an FIR against the person concerned. It is submitted that such directions are wholly beyond the powers conferred upon the Commission under the statute pursuant to which it has been constituted. He further submits that the Commission has also directed that the 4 work of installation of the gas pipeline be stopped, resulting in stoppage of the entire project. According to the petitioner, the Commission, while exercising its advisory and recommendatory powers, has virtually assumed and exercised the jurisdiction vested in other competent statutory authorities, which is impermissible in law. It is, therefore, submitted that the impugned order is, prima facie, without jurisdiction and contrary to law and is liable to be quashed. Since the impugned directions have resulted in stoppage of the ongoing project, the matter requires urgent consideration by this Court. Hence, the present petition. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Chhattisgarh State Women Commission as well as the State submits that they may be granted time to file their respective replies to the petition. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, this Court finds that the Chhattisgarh State Women Commission, while exercising its jurisdiction, has issued directions which, prima facie, travel beyond the statutory powers conferred upon it. The Commission is primarily vested with advisory and recommendatory functions and is not conferred with adjudicatory jurisdiction to determine the rights and liabilities of the parties or to issue binding directions in the nature of those contained in the impugned orders. 6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bhabani Prasad Jena v. Orissa State Commission for Women, reported in (2010) 8 SCC 633, 5 while dealing with the powers and jurisdiction of State Women Commission has observed thus:- “9. It would be seen from Section 10 of the 1993 Act that the State Commission has been authorized to take up studies in respect of economic, educational and health situation of the women of the State and also the working conditions of women in the factories, establishments, construction sites and make its recommendations to the State Government. The State Commission is empowered to compile information in respect of the offences against women and to coordinate with the State Cell and District Cells for atrocities against women. Further, the State Commission is competent to receive complaints in respect of the matters specified in Section 10(1)(d) and take up the grievances raised in the complaint/s with the concerned authorities for appropriate remedial measures. The State Commission is also given role of assisting, training and orienting the non-Government organizations in the State in legal counselling of poor women and enabling such women to get legal aid. Under Clause (f) of Section 10(1), the State Commission is authorized to inspect or cause to be inspected, a jail, remand home, women's institution or other place of custody where women are kept as prisoners or otherwise and take up with the concerned authorities these matters for remedial action. 10. In other words, the State Commission is broadly assigned to take up studies on issues of economic, educational and healthcare that may help in overall development of the women of the State; gather statistics concerning offences against women; probe into the complaints relating to atrocities on 6 women, deprivation of women of their rights in respect of minimum wages, basic health, maternity rights, etc. and upon ascertainment of facts take up the matter with the concerned authorities for remedial measures; help women in distress as a friend, philosopher and guide in enforcement of their legal rights. However, no power or authority has been given to the State Commission to adjudicate or determine the rights of the parties.” 7. Recently, in the matter of Mumbai Port Authority vs. National Commission for Scheduled Caste and Others reported in {2026 SCC OnLine 1398}, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in paragraph 9 has observed as under:- “9. We are of the considered view that the Division Bench fell in error in holding that the directions issued by NCSC in its order dated 23.10.2024 were within the scope of powers provided under the Constitution. The legislature has been quite categorical in the powers of the Civil Court that have been extended to the NCSC. The word used is “namely” whereunder certain powers have been enumerated. That indicates the limited scope of the powers granted to it. It is therefore clear that while it has powers to requisition documents and receive evidence it does not have the power to make an order in furtherance of that evidence. In other words, NCSC can record a factual finding and then 7 ask the concerned Government, either the Centre or the State to act thereupon. At this stage it would be appropriate to refer to the submission of the NCSC which states that the word “safeguards” is an enforcement limb of Sub-article (5). Such a submission is difficult to accept in view of the explicit language of the Article. It certainly does not confer adjudicatory power, at best recommendatory in nature. The power provided is to inquire into the deprivation of “rights and safeguards” of the Scheduled Castes. The use of the word “and” indicates that rights and safeguards are to be read together as a bundle. 8. In view of the aforesaid enunciation of law as well as in the present case, having regard to the orders dated 19.06.2025, 06.07.2026 and 08.07.2026 passed by the Chhattisgarh State Women Commission, this Court is of the prima facie view that the Commission has exceeded the limits of its jurisdiction by issuing directions having the effect of determining the rights and liabilities of the parties and by directing consequential action which falls within the domain of the competent statutory authorities. Such exercise of power cannot be sustained in law. 9. In view of the aforesaid undisputed position emerging from the record and the nature of the jurisdiction exercised by the Commission, this Court finds that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the impugned orders alive merely to await a 8 formal reply. Accordingly, the orders dated 19.06.2025, 06.07.2026 and 08.07.2026 passed by the Chhattisgarh State Women Commission being beyond the jurisdiction vested in the Commission, are hereby quashed and set aside. Consequently, the writ petition stands allowed. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju