Raipur Resorts And Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1863 of 2020 Raipur Resorts And Properties Pvt. Ltd. Registered Under The Companies Act, Through Its Director Rakesh Sarawagi, Aged About 57 Years, Son Of Shri Satyanaraya Sarawagi, Having Office At Villa No. 30-31, Anandam World City, Kachana Main Road, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Nawa Raipur (Atal Nagar), District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Municipal Corporation Raipur Through Commissioner Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Zonal Commissioner Zone 3, Municipal Corporation, Shankar Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh

4. The Collector Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ankur Agrawal, Advocate For State/res. No.1 & 4 :

Mr. Siddharth Dubey, GA For Res. No.3 & 4 :

Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate For Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 03/09/2020

1. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition seems to be the alleged illgegal, arbitrary action on the part of the respondents in constructing a water canal through the property exclusively owned by the petitioner.

2. According to the counsel for the petitioner there was no acquistion proceedings drawn nor was any compensation paid to the petitioner before the water canal was constructed. The petitioner further submits that he has been repeatedly approaching the respondent authorities particularly, respondent No.2 & 3 for redressal of his grievance but no response has been received by them on the said representation that he has made.

3. Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 & 3 submits that since his application and representation are still pending, let writ petition be disposed of directing the respondents to take a decision on the said application/representation at the earliest.

4. Therefore on the said submissions by the learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation, the writ petition stands disposed of directing the respondent No.2 & 3 to take a decision on the representation/application that petitioner has filed in respect of his claim for compensation on the land which has been taken over for construction of water canal at the earliest preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

5. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit