1 2026:CGHC:19086 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P(C) No.2291 of 2022 Ramnarayan Gupta S/o Late Shri Ramdas Gupta Aged About 73 Years R/o Village Daura, Post Office- Daura, Tahsil- Daura-Kochli, Police Station- Pasta, District - Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, P.O. & P.S. Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 3 - The Executive Engineer CSPDCL, Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 4 - The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.04.27 17:41:43 +0530 2 5 - The Naib Tahsildar Daura, Tahsil Daura, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) 6 - The Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 7 - Village Panchayat, Daura Through- The Sarpanch, Village- Daura, Post Office- Daura, Tahsil- Daura-Kochli, Police Station- Pasta, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Shri VK Pandey, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Shri Sabyasachi Choubey, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 25.04.2026 1. The present Writ Petition has been filed with the following reliefs:- “10.1 issue notices to the respondents returnable within early date of hearing. 10.2 set-aside/quash the action of the respondents with regard to construction of electric pole and water supply tank over the land belonging to the petitioner, in the ends of justice. 10.3 direct the respondents not to encroach the land belonging to the petitioner bearing khasra no.948 situated at village Daura without initiating any land acquisition proceeding. 10.4 Grant any other relief(s)/order(s)/direction(s) in favour of petitioner, which deemed fit & proper in the facts & circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.” 3 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that a water tank and an electric pole were proposed to be erected on the Petitioner’s private land, however, in view of the interim stay granted by this Court, neither the water tank nor the electric pole has been constructed on the said land. 3. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the Respondents/State submits that in view of the stay order passed against the other Respondent-CSPDCL, the project itself appears to have been withdrawn, therefore, at this stage, no subsisting grievance can be said to survive in favour of the Petitioner. 4. The present Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. However, liberty is reserved in favour of the Petitioner to file a fresh Petition, if so warranted by any future exigency. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Priya