← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/4480/2021disposed off

Amit Patel v. State Of Chhattisgarh,

2021-11-09Hon'Ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P.(C.) No.4420 of 2021 • Nemchand Patel S/o Jaitram Aged About 81 Years R/o Village Ragja, Tehsil Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of PWD, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Collector Janjgir-Champa, District Janjgir - Champa, Chhattisgarh.

4. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents And W.P.(C.) No.4480 of 2021 • Amit Patel S/o Lekhram Patel, Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Ragja, Tehsil Sakti, District Janjgir - Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department Of PWD, Mantralaya Mayanadi Bhawan Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Collector Janjgir - Champa, District Janjgir - Champa, Chhattisgarh

4. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Sakti, District Janjgir - Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents

-2For Petitioners - Mr. T.K. Jha, Advocate.

For State - Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer.

S.B.- Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board 09-11-2021

1. Heard.

2. Both the petitions are being disposed off by this common order.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in both the cases submits that both the petitioners are recorded owners of the lands situated in VillageRagja, Tahsil- Sakti, District- Janjgir- Champa, C.G.

4. A portion of land belonging to petitioners in both the cases have been utilized by the respondents for construction of road way back in the year 1980-81. Petitioners in both the cases have been continuously making representation to the respondent authorities praying for grant of compensation on the lands utilized in the construction of road but the representations have never been considered. The petitioners in both the cases have right to compensation on the land belonging to them utilized for construction of road. Hence, appropriate directions may be issued.

5. Learned State counsel representing all the respondents submits that the representation, if any, filed by the petitioners for both the cases shall be considered by the respondents, therefore, the petitions may be disposed of.

6. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the documents present on record.

7. Considered on the submissions, the petitioners in both the cases are granted liberty to file their representation within a period of 15 days. On filing of such representations, the respondent No.2, 3 and 4 shall be obliged to consider on the representation and take decision preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of filing application/representation.

8. With these observations, both the petitions are disposed of. Sd/- Monika (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge