Milap Singh v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited
-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 474 of 2017
1. Milap Singh S/o Budhwar Singh, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Nehru Nagar Batari, Police Station Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh)
2. Gulab Singh, S/o Budhwar Singh, Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Nehru Nagar, Batari, Police Station Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh)
3. Budhwar Singh, S/o Baljor Singh, Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Nehru Nagar, Batari, Police Station Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh)
4. Kam Singh, S/o Dhirpal Singh, Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Nehru Nagar, Batari, Police Station Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh)
5. Gaya Singh, S/o Amar Singh, Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Nehru Nagar, Batari, Police Station Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh)
6. Ramesh Singh, S/o Amar Singh, Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Nehru Nagar, Batari, Police Station Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh)
7. Chhatrapal Singh, S/o Kumar Singh, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Nehru Nagar, Batari, Police Station Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh)
8. Hari Singh, S/o Narayan Singh, Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Nehru Nagar, Batari, Police Station Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh)
9. Dharam Singh, S/o Surit Singh, Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Nehru Nagar, Batari, Police Station Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh) 10.Chandrabhawan Singh, S/o Surit Singh, Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Nehru Nagar, Batari, Police Station Dipka, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioners
Versus
1. South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through : Its Chief Managing Director, Head Quarter Seepat Road, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh)
2. South Eastern Coal Field Limited, Through : Its General Manager, Korba (West) Kusmunda, Now Gevra Area, District Korba (Chhattisgarh)
3. The Collector, Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh.
4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh
-25. The Tahsildar, Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners :
Shri Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate For SECL :
Shri Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate For State :
Shri Prasunn Bhaduri, Govt. Advocate S.B.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 01/03/2017
1. The grievance of the petitioners is that the petitioners or the father of the petitioners were allotted small pieces of plots as a measure of rehabilitation in view of acquisition of their land by the SECL. The plots were allotted to them in addition to compensation paid towards acquisition of land. The petitioners have rushed to this Court by filing this petition on an apprehension that the petitioners may be dispossessed from their respective plots illegally, without the authority of Law, without any notice.
2. Learned counsel for the respondent -SECL submits that the apprehension of the petitioners is without any basis. Till date, no notices has been given to the petitioners. He further submits that there may be cases where the plots holders may have encroached upon a land beyond the length and width of the plot allotted to them in the past. In such case, after taking into consideration due measurement in the presence of the parties and giving notice, appropriate action for eviction may be initiated.
3. It appears that the petitioners have filed this petition on the apprehension of dispossession. The documents attached with the petition show that as a measure of rehabilitation, small plots were allotted either to the petitioners or to their predecessor. If the petitioners or their predecessors have been allotted any plot under the rehabilitation scheme and such letter of allotment has been issued in their favour, they are entitled to continue. However, at the same time, if they have encroached upon any other land beyond their own plot, the respondents shall always be at liberty to take action of their dispossession in accordance with Law.
4. By way of abundant caution, it is being observed that in case, respondent
-3- -SECL intend to carry out any removal of encroachment, they would be required to carry out spot inspection and measurement and only after notice, action may be taken against the petitioners. In case the petitioners have any factual disputes with regard to measurement, their remedy would be to approach the Civil Court.
5. The petition is accordingly finally disposed off with the observations as above. Sd/-- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Praveen