Bhajan Lal Gupta And ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

i

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA W.P.(S)No.

/^-S /2015 PETITIONER.-^D Bhajan Lal Gupta S/o Ram Prasad Gupta, Aged iio 3/ ^tL^ ^^ )out- 68 years, R/o Banaras Chowk, Jawahar irket Ambikapur, Post, Tahsil & District - Ambikapur(C.G.) Rajiv Deshmukh S/o Late ^hri K.T. Deshmukh, Aged about-55 years, R/o Behind Veterinary Hospital, Bauripara Ambikapur, Post, Tahsil & District - Ambikapur (C.G.) -3) Umesh Chandra Singh S/o Shri S.B. Singh, Aged about - 54 years, Kshatriya Niwas Ring Road Bauripara, Ambikapur, Post, Tahsil & District - Ambikapur (C.G.) Hemraj Bagde S/o Lat Shri Nathuji Bagde, Aged ...4-) about - years, R/o Trimurti Bhawan, Nagdaune Colony Vyapar Vihar Road Bilaspur, 1«'

Tahsil & District-Bilaspur (C.G.) 5) Jagendra Singh Chandel S/o Late Shri Dalchand Chandel, Aged about-56 years, A-18 Rawat Residency, Manendragarh Road Ambikapur, District-Surguja (C.G.) Bhagwan Das Vishwakarma S/o Shri Har Prasad Vishwakarma, Aged about-58 years, R/o Near B.E.O. Office Bauripara Ambikapur, Post, Tahsil & District - Ambikapur (C.G.) LI'a^CtM Vishnu Kant Pandey S/o Late Shri Narcsh 7) Pandey, Aged about-55 years, Quater No. G-4 Irrigation Colony Ring Road Ambikapur, DistrictSurguja (C.G.) /'

8) Mohd. Shaikh A!i S/o Shri Jumman Khan, Aged about-56 years, Quater No. H-3, Sinchai Colony "^^^^^^^'Sf-S&Sf^^m'lgSS

z Gandhi Nagar Banaras Road Ambikapur, District-Surguja (C.G.) Pankaj Kumar Vyas S/o Shri S.R. Vyas, Aged /) about-56 year, R/o Rawat Residency, Manendragarh Road Ambikapur, DistrictSurguja (C.G.) Ramjee Pateriya S/o Shri Nanbulal Pateriya, ,10) Aged about - 56 years, Near Collector Banglo, D.C. Road Ambikapur, District-Surguja (C.G.) 11) Arun Kumar Tiwari S/o Ramanuj Prasad Tiwari, Aged about-53 years, Rawat Residency Manendragarh Road Ambikapur, DistrictSurguja (C.G.)

Versus

RESPONDENTS: -,1) State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Water Resources Department, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) '^ •J ./'/2) The Engineer-ln-Chief, Water Resources Department, Raipur (C.G.) ./'1 3')'

/'

State of Madhya Pradesh, Through the Secretary, Water Resources Department, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (M.P.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT / WRITS DIRECTION/DIRECTIONS, ORDER/ORDERS ETC.

•-NK^- ^"

V/- ^ ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Sinale Bench:

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Writ Petition (S) No. 163 of2015 Petitioner Bhajan Lal Gupta and others

VERSUS

r^ Respondents State of Chhatttisgarh and others

Present:

Shri KA. Ansari, Sr. Advocate with Shri Devesh Kela, counsel for the petitioners.

Shri PK. Bhaduri, GAforthe State.

Oral Order (21.01.2015) Shri Ansari submits that the petitioners in the instant petition, have already got an order in their favour by the writ court in an earlier round of litigation i.e. W.P. No.160/2002 videjudgment dated 20.02.2006 and the said order has attained finality.

At this juncture, he submits that though the <u petitioners have filed a contempt petition for non-compliance of the order dated 20.02.2006 but the samehas been dismissed and the fact remains that till date, the order dated 20.2.06 has not been implemented by the State Government and it is for these reasons that the present writ petition has been filed with a prayer that the State should comply with the order at the ;^ earliest.

-I 2.

Needless to mention that the settled position of law is that the writ petition for execution of earlier judgment in a writ petition would not be maintainable. At this juncture, Shri Ansari submits that he does not want to press the writ petition on merits and prays that he may be directed to withdraw the petition with a liberty to approach the respondents by way of a fresh representation claiming the right which the petitioners have accrued in their favour by virtue of order passed in WP. No.1 60/02 dated 20.02.2006. 3.

To this, the State counsel does not have any objection. 4.

Accordingly, the instant Writ Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to approach the respondents by way of making a fresh representation and on such representation being made, the same may be considered on its own merits at the earliest, preferably within a period of6 months.

Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Priya