Naval Singh v. South Eastern Coal Fields Limited

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 829 of 2017

1. Naval Singh S/o Parmohan Singh, Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Nehru Nagar Batari, Police Station Dipka Tahsil Katghora Distt. Korba, Chhattisgarh

2. Radhe Lal S/o Sukul Ram, Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Nehru Nagar Batari, Police Station Dipka Tahsil Katghora, Distt. Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. South Eastern Coal Fields 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

5. The Tahsildar, Katghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh ----Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr. Sanjay Dewangan, Advocate For SECL :

Mr. Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate For State :

Mr. R.K. Gupta, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 04/04/2017 Heard on admission.

1.

The grievance of the petitioners is that the petitioners/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 -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) J U D G E Rekha