Antram And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

Q 'c, W7"

Q

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATISGARH AT BILASPUR

W. P. (C) N0.

KK$O 0f 2014 Petitioner(s):

(1) Antram §//o Sumitram, Aged about ye/apsf'R/o Village Kete, Post Daadgaon, Police Station pfh "ww'yg/ Udaipur, Disst.

Surguja '3w.."wk"$WAo/WM (C.G.) .r'm (2) Dularsay/S/o Antram, Age about 20 yearsj"""1§/o Village Kete, Post Daadgaon, Police Station Udaipur, Disst.

Surguja (C.G.) Respondent(s):

(1) State of Chhattisgarh though secretary, Revenue Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur (CIG.) (2) Sub Divisional Officer, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) (3) Branch Manager, Central Bank of India, P.O.

Udaipur, Tehsil Ambikapur District Surguja (C.G.) wwww.ww..K WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226C§l OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1.

Particulars of petitioner(s):

m HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP(C) No,2380 Qf 2014 PETITION ER$ Antram & another -VersusRESPONDENTS:

State of Chhattisgarh & others Pre$ent Shri Shivang Dubey, counsel for the petitioners. Shri Sunil Pillai, Panel Lawyer for the State. Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. ORAL ORDER (21-1 -201 5) 1.

The petitioners have preferred this writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to allow the petitioners to withdraw the amount of compensation which has been deposited in their bank account. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that on acquisition of the petitioners' land, they have been awarded huge amount of compensation out of which they are withdrawing Rs.16 lakhs, however, the bank is not permitting to withdraw the amount on the ground that such withdrawal would be allowed only when an order/permission is obtained from the concerned Sub Divisional Officer.

3.

lf the amount has been deposited in the petitioners' bank account in iieu of acquisition of their land and there is no legal impediment for withdrawal of the amount, the concerned bank should not refuse withdrawal, as the money belongs to the petitioners and they are free to withdraw the amount lying in their bank account.

4.

At this stage, learned counsel forthe petitioners would inform this Court that the concerned Collector has issued instructions to the effect that the amount of compensation deposited in the bank account of the indigenous people/tribal people should not be allowed to be withdrawn unless permitted by the Sub Divisional Officer.

5.

Learned State counsel would inform that such instructions might have been issued for protecting the interest of tribal people and there is public policy

:L§ behind such arrangement.

6.

Considering the entire fact situation of the case, it is directed that if the petitioners move a representation before the concerned Sub Divisional Ofhcer seeking withdrawal of the amount and if the said Sub Divisional Officer is satisfied that reason for withdrawal is genuine, necessary order in 'this regard shall be passed, as early as possible, preferably within a period of 15 days from the date of submission of application. 7.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Sdh Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge