Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh v. 1 - The State of Chhattisgarh; Through: The Secretary, Departme
Case Details
Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2025:CGHC:8734 NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1378 of 2014 1 - Jagdeo Prasad Patre, S/os Hri Anad Ram @ Ritu Ram Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Cheudih Post Meu P.S. And Tahsil Pamgarh, Civil And Revenue Distt. Janjgir - Champa C.G. , Chhattisgarh 2 - Rajaram Patre S/o Shri Anand Ram @ Rituram Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Cheudih Post Meu P.S. And Tahsil Pamgarh, Civil And Revenue Distt. Janjgir - Champa C.G. , District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State of Chhattisgarh; Through: The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Thana Naya Raipur, Secretariat Maha Nadi Bhawan, Raipur C.G., Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector Janjgir - Champa, Distt. Janjgir - Champa C.G., District : Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sub Divisional officer Civil Pamgarh Distt. Janjgir Champa C.G. , District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 4 - M/s K.S.K. Vardha Power Plant Pvt. Ltd. Nariyara Distt. Janjgir Champa C.G. , District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) Petitioners
Legal Reasoning
: Ms. Meena Shastri, Advocate State/Respondents No.1 to 3 : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Deputy Advocate General For Respondent No. 4 : Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Rahul Ambast, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 19.02.2025 1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-
Decision
“10.1. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/direction/ order commanding the respondents to release the petitioners above stated land from their possession taking out the undergrounds pipelines which were laying down in their lands by the respondents. 10.2 In alternative, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondents to acquire the lands of the petitioners following the provisions of concerned provision of the "Chhattisgarh Underground Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of Underground Pipelines) of the Act-2004 and the "Chattisgarh Underground Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of Underground Pipelines) of the Rule-2004" prevailing at the time of acquisition of the land and provide sufficient compensation to the petitioners. 10.3. The Hon’ble Court further be pleased to direct the respondents to provide compensation for such dispossession from the land with bank rate interest and also for unnecessary harassment. 10.4. Any other relief(s), which may deems fit, looking to the facts & circumstances of the case may be given to the petitioners.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would make the following submissions:- A. The petitioners are the owners of the land bearing survey No.79/1, ad- measuring 2.50 decimal, adjacent to the main road (Bilaspur to Shivrinarayan Road), Survey No.125/4, area 0.30 acre (30 decimal), situated at Cheudih, Tehsil Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa. B. In the month of April, 2013, the respondents used some part of the property of the petitioners for laying down underground pipelines. C. She would contend that no notice was served upon the petitioners and without obtaining their consent; the respondents used their lands for the underground pipelines. D. It is argued that after agitation, a meeting was called between villagers and respondents and a decision was taken on 04.04.2013. According to the conclusion of the meeting, the land owners were held entitled to get compensation according to the Rules of 2012-2013. The rate of land adjacent to the road was to be assessed according to the rate prescribed in the guidelines. E. Though the award was passed according to the Chhattisgarh Underground Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of Underground Pipelines) Rules, 2004, but the names of the petitioners are not available. F. She would pray that a direction may be issued to the respondents to assess the compensation strictly in accordance with the outcome of the meeting dated 04.04.2014. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, learned Senior Advocate appearing for respondent No. 4 would submit that it is open for the petitioners to approach the learned District Judge according to the provisions of Section 9(3) of the Chhattisgarh Underground Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of Underground Pipelines) Act, 2004. He would contend that the concerned Sub Divisional officer (Revenue) [for short, SDO(R)] issued a notice to the petitioners to appear and collect the compensation, but they failed to appear, and filed this petition directly without availing efficacious alternative remedy. He would also contend that the compensation payable to the petitioners has already been assessed; thus, he would contend that the instant petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. Mr. Vinay Pandey, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State would submit that petitioner No.1- Jagdeo Prasad Patre had already approached the SDO(R) according to the provisions of Section 9(2) of the Act, 2004; thus, this petition is not maintainable. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents as well as the provisions of the Act, 2004 and the Rules, 2004. 6. A conciliation meeting was held between the parties on 04.04.2013 and the following decision was taken :- “ मा(cid:2)नन(cid:4)य ाሺ(cid:2)(cid:7)ाሺद माहो(cid:10)दय(cid:2) एवं(cid:7) कले(cid:15)क्टर ቛኋ(cid:2)र(cid:2) यहो निन्ቓ(cid:22)य लिलेय(cid:2) गय(cid:2) निक - हा(cid:2)ईवे(cid:5) से(cid:5) लगी(cid:9) ्ቚथम खे(cid:5)त का(cid:2) म(cid:16)आवेजा(cid:2) रजिजास्ኍ(cid:23) दर से(cid:5) पहाल(cid:5) जा(cid:30) म(cid:31)ल्य 1. ( गी(cid:2)ईड ल(cid:2)ईन 2012-13) ल(cid:2)गी(cid:31) हा(cid:30), उसे(cid:9) का(cid:5) आधा(cid:2)र पर भु(cid:16)गीत(cid:2)न किकाय(cid:2) जा(cid:2)य(cid:5)गी(cid:2)। म(cid:2)्ቊ(cid:28) 2013 हा(cid:2)ईवे(cid:5) से(cid:5) लगी(cid:9) ्ቚथम खे(cid:5)त का(cid:5) बा(cid:2)द कि(त(cid:9)य खे(cid:5)त का(cid:2) 2. म(cid:16)आवेजा(cid:2) ( जिजासेका(cid:2) खेसेर(cid:2) न)बार हा(cid:2)ईवे(cid:5) से(cid:5) लगी(cid:2) किकान्त(cid:16) म+का(cid:5) पर अन(cid:5)का खे(cid:5)त- म. बाटा(cid:2) हा(cid:30) य(cid:2) अन्य खेसेर(cid:2) न)बार हा-) प(cid:31)वे(cid:2)(cid:28)न(cid:16)से(cid:2)र हा(cid:9) रहा(cid:5)गी(cid:2) । किकासे(cid:2)न- का(cid:5) किहात का(cid:30) ध्य(cid:2)न म. रखेत(cid:5) हुए अगीर का) पन(cid:9) 3. ्ቊ(cid:2)हा(cid:5) त(cid:30) प(cid:2)इप ल(cid:2)इन म. परिरवेत(cid:28)न कार शा(cid:2)सेका6य जाम(cid:9)न से(cid:5) प(cid:2)इप ल(cid:2)ईन ल(cid:5) जा(cid:2) सेकात(cid:9) हा7। यहा म(cid:16)आवेजा(cid:2) दर ቇኋ(cid:2)म जाहा(cid:2)) पर प(cid:2)ईप ल(cid:2)इन ड(cid:2)ल(cid:2) ्ቊ(cid:5)ऊड(cid:9)हा का(cid:5) 1.6 किका.म(cid:9). का(cid:2)य(cid:28) प(cid:31)्ቓ(cid:28) जा(cid:2)न(cid:2) शा(cid:5)ष हा7, प(cid:2)ईप ल(cid:2)ईन, पर हा(cid:9) ल(cid:2)गी(cid:31) हा(cid:30)गी(cid:2), हा(cid:30) ्ቊ(cid:16)का(cid:5) पर ल(cid:2)गी(cid:31) नहा< हा(cid:30)गी(cid:2)। भु(cid:31)मिम का6 गी्ቓन(cid:2) 3 म(cid:9)टार का6 प(cid:2)मगीढ़ का(cid:5) न(cid:5)त@त्वे ्ቊ+़(cid:2)ई से(cid:5) किकाय(cid:2) जा(cid:2)य(cid:5)गी(cid:2)। एसे.ड(cid:9).एम. जिजासेम. म. म+का(cid:5) का(cid:2) सेቜኌCमल(cid:9)त जा(cid:2))्ቊ किकाय(cid:2) जा(cid:2)य(cid:5)गी(cid:2) से)बा)मिधात का@ षका, का) पन(cid:9) का(cid:2) ्ቚकितकिनमिधा एवे) शा(cid:2)सेन का6 ओर से(cid:5) एका ्ቚकितकिनमिधा का(cid:5) रूप म. उपቝኌGत रहा.गी(cid:5)। प(cid:2)इप ल(cid:2)इन का(cid:5) का(cid:2)य(cid:28) का(cid:30) ्ቤवेधा(cid:2)न उत्प्ቐ कारन(cid:5) से(cid:5) मन(cid:2) किकाय(cid:2)। म(cid:2)न. से(cid:2))सेद महा(cid:30)दय(cid:2) एवे) काल(cid:5)क्टार का(cid:5) उक्त से(cid:16)झा(cid:2)वे पर उपቝኌGत सेभु(cid:9) किकासे(cid:2)न- न(cid:5) अपन(cid:9) सेहामत(cid:9) ्ቤक्त किकाय(cid:2) ” 7. From a perusal of Annexure R/8, the application moved by petitioner No.1 before the SDO(R), it is apparent that petitioner No.1 stated in his application that compensation has not been paid by the authorities though his land has been used to lay down pipelines. 8. The answering respondents have not annexed the documents to substantiate that any decision was taken in favour or against petitioner No.1 in that proceeding. 9. The land of the petitioners has been used by the respondent authorities and the same is not disputed by the counsel appearing for the respondents. 10.From a perusal of the award dated 23.01.2012, it is quite vivid that survey Nos. 79/1 & 125/4, pertaining to the petitioners, do not find a place in the award. 11.It appears that the respondent authorities have not considered the claims of the petitioners with regard to payment of compensation according to the decision taken on 04.04.2013; therefore, this petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioners to make a representation along with relevant documents before respondent No.3 within a period of 20 days. The authority concerned shall decide the representation strictly in accordance with the decision dated 04.04.2014 within a further period of 150 days. 12.The petitioners would be entitled to get interest from the date of the acquisition of their land till the payment of compensation, if already not paid. 13. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), this petition is hereby disposed of. Sd/- NADIM Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judge