1 2026:CGHC:18742 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 32 of 2026 1 - Sukhuram S/o Kondaram Aged About 63 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 2 - Gangaram S/o Sukhauram Aged About 45 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 3 - Santram S/o Bhurhuram Aged About 65 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 4 - Khikdas S/o Punauram Aged About 78 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 5 - Shuklaldas S/o Sonadas Aged About 75 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 6 - Kanhaiyalal S/o Jagnnath Prasad Aged About 63 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 7 - Suklal S/o Milap Aged About 75 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 8 - Budaluram S/o Uderam Aged About 70 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 9 - Saritalal S/o Sammelal Aged About 43 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 10 - Prakash Kumar S/o Photulal Aged About 45 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 11 - Dasruram S/o Kanshiram Aged About 80 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI 2 12 - Anjordas S/o Jodhiram Aged About 63 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 13 - Gangamati S/o Sammelal Aged About 55 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 14 - Nathuram S/o Dwasram Aged About 65 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 15 - Phirturam S/o Jhithuram Aged About 63 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 16 - Rampal S/o Manbodhiram Aged About 51 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 17 - Sahodri S/o Panchram Aged About 60 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 18 - Dharamdas Mother Of Dokri Aged About 69 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 19 - Mayaram S/o Kondaram Aged About 67 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 20 - Chhatturam S/o Faudaram Aged About 65 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 21 - Monu S/o Sidhuram Aged About 30 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 22 - Lakhanlal S/o Tulsiram Aged About 70 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 23 - Bhagirathi M/o Punibai Aged About 51 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 24 - Hemant S/o Hathiram Aged About 65 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 25 - Ramprasad S/o Mohitram Aged About 86 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 26 - Janakram S/o Mohitram Aged About 85 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 27 - Hemlal S/o Sukdev Aged About 55 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 3 28 - Teejram S/o Pitambar Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 29 - Khushram S/o Panduram Aged About 57 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 30 - Hargovind S/o Panduram Aged About 56 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 31 - Dharam S/o Bipat Aged About 60 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 32 - Ghasiyaram S/o Chandan Aged About 85 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 33 - Nanduram S/o Cheduram Aged About 50 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 34 - Gopal S/o Sukhram Aged About 57 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 35 - Gulab Bai W/o Ghuna Aged About 60 Years R/o Village- Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Department Of Water Resource Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, New Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Champa Cum Land Acquisition Officer Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 4 - Executive Engineer Water Resource Department Janjgir, Head Office Chapa District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from CIS System) For Petitioners : Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Advocate For State : Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Panel Lawyer 4 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 23/04/2026 1. The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs: “10.1) This, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction to direct the respondent's for conducting spot inspection and if it is found that the land of the petitioners is coming under sub mergence then they may be directed to compensate the petitioners within stipulated time. 10.2) That, any other Writ, Order, Directions or Relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Facts of the case, as projected in the petition, are that all the petitioners are agriculturists residing in Village Devrani, Tahsil Bamnihdih, District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh), and they derive their livelihood primarily from agricultural activities carried out on their respective lands. It is stated that each of the petitioners is the recorded owner (or successor of the original owner) of agricultural lands bearing different khasra numbers with varying extents, as detailed in the petition. It is the case of the petitioners that in connection with the construction of the Basantpur Barrage over the Mahanadi River, acquisition 5 proceedings were undertaken by the respondent authorities. However, due to an error committed by the survey team during the course of acquisition and spot inspection, the names of the petitioners were not included in the acquisition records, despite the fact that their lands have been affected and have come under submergence. As a result, the petitioners have been deprived of the use and enjoyment of their agricultural lands and are unable to cultivate the same. The petitioners submit that they have made several representations before the competent authorities, including a detailed representation submitted before the Collector, District Janjgir-Champa, requesting inclusion of their lands in the acquisition proceedings and seeking appropriate compensation. However, despite repeated representations, no action has been taken by the respondents, compelling the petitioners to approach this Court seeking limited relief for consideration of their representation within a stipulated time. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in not considering the petitioners’ claim is arbitrary, unjust and violative of their constitutional and legal rights. It is contended that the right to property, though no longer a fundamental right, is a constitutional right protected under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, and no person can be deprived of his property except by authority of law and due process. In the present case, the lands of the petitioners have been effectively taken over and submerged due 6 to the construction of the barrage, yet no compensation has been awarded to them. It is further submitted that the omission of the petitioners’ names from the acquisition proceedings is purely due to a mistake on the part of the survey team, and the petitioners cannot be made to suffer for such an administrative lapse. The authorities are under an obligation to conduct proper spot inspection and verify whether the lands of the petitioners fall within the submergence area, and if so, to grant them compensation in accordance with law within a reasonable time. Learned counsel also submits that in an identical matter, this Court in WPC No. 5896 of 2024 (Sant Kumar and others vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others), vide order dated 09.12.2024, has directed the respondent authorities to consider similar claims of affected landowners. It is contended that the present case stands on similar footing, and therefore, the petitioners are entitled to the same relief. It is further argued that the State Government has already compensated similarly situated persons whose lands were affected by the same project, and denial of similar treatment to the petitioners amounts to discrimination and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, it is prayed that this Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the representation of the petitioners and grant them appropriate compensation after due verification of their claims within a stipulated time frame. 7 4. Learned State counsel, opposing the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners, submits that the present petition is misconceived and not maintainable at this stage. It is contended that the acquisition proceedings for the Basantpur Barrage have been carried out strictly in accordance with law and after due survey and verification by the competent authorities. The omission of the petitioners’ names, if any, cannot be presumed without proper verification, and mere assertions of submergence are not sufficient to claim compensation as a matter of right. It is further submitted that the petitioners have an alternative and efficacious remedy available before the competent revenue authorities to establish their claims by producing relevant documents and seeking appropriate adjudication. The State counsel submits that unless the claims of the petitioners are duly verified through proper procedure, no direction for compensation can be issued by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction. It is also argued that the respondents are willing to examine any genuine representation submitted by the petitioners in accordance with law, however, the present petition seeking blanket directions is not tenable. Accordingly, it is prayed that the writ petition deserves to be dismissed or, in the alternative, the petitioners may be relegated to avail appropriate remedy before the competent authority. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the documents enclosed along with the petition. 8 6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the limited grievance of the petitioners, this Court finds that the petitioners are claiming that their lands have come under submergence due to construction of Basantpur Barrage over the Mahanadi River and that they have not been paid compensation. If the lands of the petitioners are in fact submerged, they would be entitled to consideration of their claim in accordance with law. Article 300-A of the Constitution of India protects the right to property, and no person can be deprived of his property except by authority of law. 7. In view of the aforesaid, without entering into the merits of the case, this petition is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to conduct spot inspection of the lands of the petitioners. If it is found that the lands of the petitioners are coming under submergence on account of construction of Basantpur Barrage over the Mahanadi River, the respondents shall take appropriate steps for initiation of acquisition proceedings, if not already initiated, and ensure payment of compensation to the petitioners strictly in accordance with law. 8. It is further directed that the petitioners shall submit a fresh representation along with all relevant documents before the competent authority within a period of two weeks from today. Upon receipt of such representation, the respondent authorities shall consider and decide the same and complete the entire exercise within a period of 90 days thereafter. 9 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Shayna Judge