1 2026:CGHC:18614 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1120 of 2021 Akash Kumar Divya S/o Late Shri Kaleshwar @ Kalesar Divya Aged About 30 Years Bhadrapara, Purana Guru Ghasidas Chowk, Police Station Balco, District Korba Kabirdham District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - South Eastern Coalfields Limited The Chairman Cum Managing Director, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The General Manager South Eastern Coalfields Limited Dipka Area, District Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Collector Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Brijlal Bharadwaj S/o Late Shri Mukundram Bharadwaj R/o Village Chakabuda, Post Office Jawali, Police Station Banki Mongara, District Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Manharan Lal Narang S/o Shri Daharu Narang R/o Village Thadgabahra, Police Station And Tahsil Baloda, District Janggir Champa Chhattisgarh Present Adress Village Sirkikhurd, Tahsil Katghora District Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Madhukar Parasad Sonwani R/o Village Premnager Surakachhar, Police Station Banki Mongara, District Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Awadhesh Kumar Bharadwaj S/o Late Shri Kejau Ram Bharadwaj R/o Village Chakabuda, Post Office Jawali, Police Station Banki Mongara, District Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2 : Mr. Anumesh Shrivastava, Advocate For State : Mr. Anil S. Pandey, Government Advocate Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2 For Respondents No.5 & 7 : Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 23/04/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief:– “10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to this case from possession of the respondents for it's kind perusal; 10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ/order/direction, commanding the respondent no.1 to 3 to take appropriate action upon the complaints (Annexure P/2 & Annexure P/4) of the petitioner; 10.3 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ/order/direction, commanding the respondent no.1 & 2 to remove the respondent no.4 to 7 from service; 10.4. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ/order/direction, commanding the respondent no.1 & 2 to give employment to the petitioner in lieu of the lands acquired from Kalesar (the father of the petitioner), Jagesar (the uncle of the petitioner), Mukesh Kumar (the uncle of the petitioner) and Govind (the grandfather of the petitioner); and 10.5. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the lands bearing Survey Nos. 107, 134, 135, 136, 163, 166, 167, 202, 257/3, 257/4, 259/1, 259/3, 259/4, 259/5, 373, 437/1, 437/5, 437/6, total admeasuring 16.45 acres, situated at village Siraki, Tehsil Katghora, District Korba, were recorded in the name of Kalesar (father of the 3 petitioner), Jagesar, Mukesh Kumar and Govind in revenue records. The aforesaid properties were ancestral/family properties of Kalesar, father of the petitioner. She would further submit that there is no relationship between the petitioner and respondent Nos.4 to 7, but respondent Nos.4 to 7 managed to secure employment in lieu of land acquisition. She would also submit that complaints were made before the SECL authorities as well as before the Collector, but no action has been taken till date; thus, she would pray that appropriate directions may be issued to take action against respondent Nos.4 to 7. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and submit that FIRs have already been registered against respondents No. 4 to 7. Awadhesh Kumar (respondent No. 7) and Madhukar Prasad (respondent No. 6) challenged the FIRs by filing CRMP No. 348/2023 and CRMP No. 1100 of 2024, and vide order dated 09.05.2024, the FIRs pertaining to them were quashed. 4. Heard. 5. Taking into consideration the fact that FIRs have already been registered against respondent Nos.4 to 7 and the FIRs registered against Awadhesh Kumar and Madhukar have already been quashed by the Hon’ble Division Bench, in my opinion, the grievance of the petitioner has already been reddressed. 6. Accordingly, the petition is hereby disposed of. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail remedy available under the law. The petitioner would also be at liberty to pursue the pending representations before the SECL authorities. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim