1 CGHC010310422026 2026:CGHC:41643-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 879 of 2026 1 - Krishna Kumar Kashyap S/o Late Shri Kunjram Kashya Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Ghivra, Police Station Birra, District Sakti (C.G.) 2 - Smt. Shashi Kashyap W/o Ishwar Prasad Kashyap Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Ghivra, Police Station Birra, District Sakti (C.G.) 3 - Smt. Sarita Kashyap W/o Govindram Kashyap Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Jamdi, Police Station Hasaud District Sakti (C.G.) 4 - Smt. Ritu Kashyap W/o Sakhiram Kashyap Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Singhul, Police Station Sivrinarayan, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 5 - Hirdebai Wd/o Late Shri Kunjram Kashyap Aged About 73 Years R/o Village Ghivra, Police Station Birra, District Sakti (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 3 - The SDO (R) and Land Acquisition Officer Sakti District Sakti/ Janjgir, Champa (C.G.) 4 - The Executive Engineer, Hasdev Canal Water Management Division, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellant : Mr. Avadhesh Mishra, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Govt. Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2 Hon'ble Shri Krushna Ram Mohapatra , Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Santosh Sharma , Judge Order on Board Per Krushna Ram Mohapatra , Chief Justice 25.09.2026 1. Heard Mr. Avadhesh Mishra, learned counsel for the Appellants and Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/ respondents. 2. This intra-Court appeal has been filed by the Appellants assailing the judgment dated 10.07.2026 passed by learned Single Judge in WPC No. 4977 of 2023. 3. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Appellants prays for withdrawal of the appeal seeking liberty to workout their remedy. 4. Mr. Tamaskar, learned Government Advocate submits that the writ appeal itself is not maintainable. There is no scope to re-open the land acquisition proceeding after lapse of 39 years. He, however, submits that he has no objection to the prayer for withdrawal of the appeal. 5. In that view of the matter, the writ appeal is dismissed with an observation that the Appellants, if so advised, may work out remedy, if any, available under the law. Sd/- Sd/- (Santosh Sharma) (Krushna Ram Mohapatra) Judge Chief Justice Chandra