Jageshwar Prasad Pradhan v. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector, Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh
Case at a glance
- Bench
- NARESH KUMAR CHANDRAVANSHI
- Neutral citation
- 2024:CGHC:47197
Outcome
Disposed of
petitioner, this petition is disposed of, directing respondent No
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. The pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge DEEPTI JHA NIRALA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA NIRALA 16:57:00 +0530
Judgment
Tahsildar Pali, Korba, District Korba (C.G.).
Mukhisingh, S/o Shri Chain Singh, Aged About 67 Years, R/o Kanjipani, Tahsil Pali, Korba, District Korba (C.G.).
National Highways Authority Of India, Through Project Director, NHAI, PIU Korba, Office Of The Project Director, Korba, District Korba (C.G.). ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner For State/Respondents No.1 to 3 For Respondent No.5. : Mr. Syed Ishhadil Ali, Advocate. : Mr. Keshav Gupta, G.A. : Mr. Ravikar Patel, counsel appears on behalf of Mr. Dhiraj Wankhede, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order on Board 02/12/2024
Heard.
This petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.2 to decide the impugned application dated
27.03.2023 and 18.01.2023 within stipulated time.
10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the compensation in respect of land acquisition on the land of village Kanjipani Khasra No.378/3 area 0.121 hectare until impugned application dated 27.03.2023 not get decided by the respondent No.2.
10.3 Any other order/relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, proper and just in the facts and circumstances of the present case may also kindly be awarded to the petitioner in the ends of justice and equity.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has purchased a parcel of land bearing 0.048 hectare from Khasra No.378/3, area 0.121 hectare vide registered sale deed dated 13.07.2020. Thereafter, aforesaid land was acquired for widening of National Highway-130 of Bilaspur to Katghora, but mutation application filed by the petitioner was rejected by respondent No.3/Tehsildar Pali, District Korba (C.G.) vide order dated
11.04.2022, against which petitioner filed application/representation (Annexure-P/1) dated 27.03.2023 before the respondent No.2/Sub- Divisional Officer / Land Acquisition Officer National Highway-130, Indian National Highway, District Korba (C.G.), despite that, same has not been decided yet, therefore, he prays that this petition may be disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the application/representation (Annexure-P/1) within a period specified by this Court.
4. Counsel for the respondents have no objection to allow the limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner.
Operative part
5. Having considered the limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner, this petition is disposed of, directing respondent No.2/Sub- Divisional Officer / Land Acquisition Officer National Highway-130, Indian National Highway, District Korba (C.G.) to consider and decide the application/representation (Annexure-P/1) dated 27.03.2023 filed by the petitioner, within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt/submission of copy of this order.
With the aforesaid direction(s), this petition stands disposed of.
The pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge DEEPTI JHA NIRALA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA NIRALA 16:57:00 +0530
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petitioner, this petition is disposed of, directing respondent No
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.