Hariom v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR FAM No. 39 of 2016 • Hariom S/o Patramdas Agrawal, Aged About 60 Years R/o Naila, Tah. Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ........... (Claimant) ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through: The Collector, Janjgir, DistrictJanjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
2. Land Acquisition OfÏcer, Janjgir, District- Janjgir-Champa, Through: Sub Divisional OfÏcer (Revenue), District- JanjgirChampa, Chhattisgarh
3. Executive Engineer (Civil), Construction Division-2, 2x500 M.Watt, Madwa, Tendubhata Taap Vidyut Pariyojna, Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent And FAM No. 40 Of 2016 • Radhe Lal Rathore S/o Lal Ji Rathore, Aged About 50 Years R/o Village- Kanhaiband, Tah. Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ...........(Claimant) ---- Petitioner Vs
1. State Of Chhattisgarh , Through: The Collector, Janjgir, DistrictJanjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
2. Land Acquisition OfÏcer, Janjgir, District- Janjgir-Champa, Through: Sub Divisional OfÏcer (Revenue), District- JanjgirChampa, Chhattisgarh
3. Executive Engineer (Civil), Construction Division-2, 2x500 M.Watt, Madwa, Tendubhata Taap Vidyut Pariyojna, Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent And FAM No. 41 Of 2016
1. Ramnarayan S/o Maniram Rathore, Aged About 53 Years
2. Shri Bai D/o Maniram Rathore, Aged About 60 Years
3. Shail Kumar D/o Maniram Rathore, Aged About 57 Years All R/o Janjgir (Below Champa Road Cenal, Besides Dr. Prasad, Ward No.8), Tah. Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ............(Claimants) ---- Petitioner Vs
1. State Of Chhattisgarh , Through: The Collector, Janjgir, DistrictJanjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
2. Land Acquisition OfÏcer, Janjgir, District- Janjgir-Champa, Through: Sub Divisional OfÏcer (Revenue), District- JanjgirChampa, Chhattisgarh
3. Executive Engineer (Civil), Construction Division-2, 2x500 M.Watt, Madwa, Tendubhata Taap Vidyut Pariyojna, Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioners Mr. Shrawan Agarwal, Advocate For Respondent /State Mr. Vivek Sharma, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Hon'ble Shri Justice Chandra Bhushan Bajpai Order On Board 29/7/2016
1. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that in view of the ofÏce objections regarding non payment of adequate court fees, he has no other option except to challenge the constitutional validity of Section 8 of the Court Fees Act, 1870 (in short "the Act"), under which, the appellants have been made liable to pay court fees and the objection to the said effect has been held by the Division Bench to be in accordance with law
vide order dated 09.05.2016.
2. In view of the above, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that the appellants may be permitted to withdraw the appeals as the appellants intend to challenge the vires of Section 8 of the Act.
3. In view of the submission made, the appellants are permitted to withdraw these appeals.
4. Accordingly, all the three first appeals are dismissed, as withdrawn Sd/- Sd/- Judge Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) (Chandra Bhushan Bajpai) Shyna