Allowed

Gurudev v. Union of India

Chhattisgarh HC15 Jul 2022WPC/3093/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by legal successors regarding non-payment of compensation and lack of rehabilitation for land acquired by SECL under Coal Bearing Act, 1957. Court allowed prayers directing respondents to decide fresh representation within 3 months and consider GOI memo dated 04.08.2017.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to make fresh representation within 3 weeks; Respondents 2 & 3 directed to decide within 3 months and consider GOI memo dated 04.08.2017.

Gurudev Vs Union of India — Land Acquisition | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPC No. 3093 of 2022

¶5

1. Gurudev S/o Late Sagar Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Choura, Tehsil Rajpur, District Balrampur - Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh In The Compensation Chart Petitioners Father Name is Mentioned he Is Dead After His Death Petitioner Is The Legal Successor (Mentioned At Serial No. 12 Of Compensation Chart)

¶6

2. Shanti Gupta W/o Vidhyasagar Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Choura, Tehsil Rajpur, District Balrampur - Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh (Mentioned At Serial No. 09 Of Compensation Chart)

¶7

3. Chunnilal S/o Somarsaay Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Choura, Tehsil Rajpur, District Balrampur - Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh (Mentioned At Serial No. 07 Of Compensation Chart)

¶8

---- Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

1. Union Of India Through Ministry Of Coal, Rajpath Area, Central Secretariat, New Delhi 110001

¶11

2. South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through Its Chairman-Cum-Managing Director Seepat Road, Bialspur (C.G.)

¶12

3. Sub Area Managerjagannathpur Sub- Area Office At Jagannath Tehsil Pratappur, District - Surajpur (C.G.)

¶13

4. Regional Revenue Officer S.E.C.L. Bhatgaon Region Bhatgaon District Surajpur (C.G.)

¶14

5. Collector District Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.)

¶15

6. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Rajpur District - Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.)

¶16

---- Respondents

¶17

For Petitioners	: None.
For Union of India/Respondent	: Ms. Anuja Sharma, Advocate
For SECL/Respondent No.2 to 4	: Shri Pankaj Agrawal, along with Shri Amit Tirkey Advocates
For State/Respondent No.5 & 6	: Ms.Sameeksha Gupta P.L.

¶18

¶19

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board

¶20

15.07.2022

¶21

1. Counsel for the respondents submits that identical writ petitions have already been disposed of by this Court in a bunch of writ petitions deiced on 10.09.2021 leading case of which being WP(C) No. 3643 of 2021 and other connected matters.

¶22

2. In view of the same, the present writ petition is also disposed of in similar term.

¶23

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners' land have been acquired by the respondent No.2- South Eastern Coal Fields Limited (SECL), under the provisions of Coal Bearing Act (Acquisition and Development Act), 1957 (for short the “Act of 1957”) in lieu of which neither compensation has been paid to the petitioners nor rehabilitation has been provided to them till date. The petitioners have also made representations before the competent authorities but it has not been considered and decided till date. He would further submit that respondents are not taking cognizance of the memo dated 04.08.2017 issued by Government of India in which certain clarifications have been issued.

¶24

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶25

5. The prayer appears to be fair and reasonable and is accordingly allowed.

¶26

6. Considering the facts of the case, the petitioners are given liberty to make a fresh representation to Respondents No. 2 & 3 within a period of 3 weeks from today and if such representation is filed,

¶27

¶28

Respondents No.2 & 3 are directed to decided the representation strictly in accordance with law within a further period of 3 months from the date of receipt of the copy of the representation. The respondents are also directed to take cognizance of the memo dated 04.08.2017 issued by the Government of India.

¶29

7. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition accordingly stands disposed off. No order as to cost(s).

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge

¶32

Jyoti

Gurudev v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurudev v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhay Singh Gill Vs Union of India

General Manager (Personnel / Mp) Vs Subhash Bai

Kodiya Sahkari Prakriya and Vipran Sanstha Maryadit Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Davinder Singh Gandhi

M/s Shriram Printers and Stationers Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/s Kaiyumi Printing Press Vs State of Chhattisgarh