Disposed

Sita Ram Bisi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC22 Apr 2022WPPIL/90/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh disposed of a Writ Petition (PIL) regarding the illegal construction of a Panchayat Bhavan on land belonging to the School Education Department. Permitting construction followed by handover to the school was deemed in the best interest of students.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to the State Government to complete the construction of the Panchayat Bhavan, to be handed over to the School Education Department for student use upon completion.

Sita Ram Bisi Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Land Acquisition | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPPIL No. 90 of 2020

¶5

Sita Ram Bisi S/o Chandra Bisi Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Dwari, Tahsil Ambabhana, District Bargarh (Odisha)., District : Bargarh *, Orissa

¶6

Brindawan Pradhan S/o Dani Pradhan Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Tora, Tahsil Baramkela, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶7

Rajesh Pradhan S/o Shri Balamani Pradhan Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Jaipur, Tahsil Baramkela, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶8

Sunil Kumar Pradhan S/o Shri Fakir Mohan Pradhan Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Tora, Tahsil Baramkela, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶9

Haladhar Bisi S/o Chaitan Bisi Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Tora, Tahsil Baramkela, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶10

Abhimanyu Pradhan S/o Kiroti Pradhan Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Tora, Tahsil Baramkela, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶11

---- Petitioners

¶12

Versus

¶13

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶14

Secretary Department Of Panchayat, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶15

Collector Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶16

District Education Officer Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶17

Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Tora, Tahsil Baramkela, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶18

Secretary Gram Panchayat Tora, Tahsil Baramkela, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶19

Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶20

Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Baramkela, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶21

---- Respondents

¶22

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

¶23

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For petitioners : Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Adv. For Respondents No. 1 to 4 & 7 : Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, Dy. Adv. General For Respondents No. 5 & 6 : Mr. Rajendra Tripathi, Adv.

¶24

Reserved on 24-2-2022

¶25

Judgment delivered on 22-4-2022

¶26

¶27

Hon'ble Mr. Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. N.K. Chandravanshi, Judge

¶28

CAV ORDER

¶29

Per N.K. Chandravanshi, J.

¶30

1. This Writ Petition (PIL) has been preferred by the petitioners against the action on the part of the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Tora, Tahsil Baramkela, Distt. Raigarh (CG) whereby the Sarpanch has started construction of Panchayat Bhavan on the Khasra No. 720, wherein a school is situated and the place where construction is being done, flag hoisting on Independence day and Republic Day and other activities are done by the school.

¶31

2. Case of the petitioners, in brief, is that petitioner No. 1 Sitaram Bisi is son of late Tapi Bisi and late Tapi Bisi was only daughter of Alabati (in some documents, name is mentioned as 'Kalabati'). Alabati was recorded owner of Khasra No. 720 of village Tora. After death of Alabati in the year 1975-76, late Tapi Bisi succeeded the land. With the consent of Alabati and villagers, the land was handed over to the School Education Department for better education of children. A school building was constructed over the land. Some part of said land is used for playground and other activities by the students. But Sarpanch has started construction of Panchayat Bhavan in that place illegally and without any authority. The petitioners and other villagers made complaint to the authorities in this regard, but it went in vain. Hence, they have filed present writ petition.

¶32

3. Return has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 8, wherein it has been stated that village Tora is situated in a low lying area, which is in close proximity of Mahanadi river and Hirakund dam. In rainy season, flood devastates the nearby villages and village Tora is totally submerged in water. The land in question is situated at higher ground level and therefore, in the

¶33

¶34

interest of villagers of the village, to provide them relief and other help during flood time, alleged Panchayat Bhavan is being constructed after seeking necessary approval from the Collector, Distt. Raigarh. It has been further stated that respondent No. 8 is not staking any claim over the land in question and if it is directed by this Court, the respondent no. 8 is ready to hand over the building to whosoever, as is directed by the Court.

¶35

4. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties, this Court passed an order of status-quo on 17-9-2020.

¶36

5. On 9-3-2021, when the matter came up for hearing, following order was passed :-

¶37

“When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on the last occasion i.e., on 17.09.2020, the nature of the grievance projected from the part of the Petitioners was taken note of. The land was surrendered by the mother of the 1st Petitioner for construction of the School, as borne by Annexure P/6 and quite surprisingly, the Local Authority, who is absolutely having no right over the property, is effecting some construction in the said property, which was sought to be resisted, but in vain and hence the writ petition.

¶38

This Court, after hearing the parties on both the sides, directed the Respondents to get instructions and explain how the land belonging to the Education Department came to the hands of the Gram Panchayat. Urgent notice was issued to the Respondents No. 5 to 8 as well; simultaneously passing an interim order of status quo to be maintained.

¶39

¶40

Pursuant to completion of service of notice, Respondents No. 5 to 8 appeared through Shri B.D. Guru, Advocate.

¶41

Despite the lapse of nearly six months, no reply has been filed either from the part of the State or from the part of the Local Authority.

¶42

Shri Pradhan, the learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the District Collector is quite arbitrarily pressurizing the Petitioners to withdraw the writ petition and also to have the matter settled with the Gram Panchayat. Unofficial meetings are stated as being convened. The learned counsel also submits that the Petitioners are not willing to accede to the pressure exerted by the Collector and till date, no reply has been filed from the part of the State who is playing hide and seek game. The interim order of status quo passed by this Court is also not given effect to in strict sense, submits the learned counsel. The learned counsel also submits that an equiry has been conducted by the State and a copy of the report has been caused to be filed before this Court, the gist of which is to the effect that the Government is of the view that the construction of the Gram Panchayat building be effected outside the area of the School.

¶43

Shri Verma, the learned Advocate General appears and submits that the issue is being considered by the Government and appropriate corrective measures have been taken up. It is also stated that the authorities are taking steps, particularly, with the intervention of the District Collector,

¶44

¶45

adding that the construction is half way through, though the status quo is maintained. It is further stated that steps are being worked out to hand over the building to the School itself and time is sought for to file an affidavit in this regard.

¶46

List this matter for further consideration after two weeks.

¶47

In view of the submissions made by the learned Advocate General, we do not proceed to pass any strictures or such other orders against the District Collector or the other authorities, but for extending the interim order of status quo till the next date of hearing.”

¶48

6. Pursuant to the observation made by this Court vide order dated 9-3-2021, the Collector, District Raigarh (CG) has filed his affidavit, which is reproduced below :-

¶49

“AFFIDAVIT

¶50

I, Bhim Singh, aged about 45 years S/o. Shri Suraj Singh, presently working as Collector, District Raigarh (CG), do hereby state on oath as under :-

¶51

That, the present affidavit is filed in compliance of the order dated 09/03/2021 passed by the Hon'ble Court.

¶52

That, in compliance of the order passed by the Hon'ble Court, the deponent, having the highest regards and great respect for the lawful authority of this Hon'ble Court, respectfully submits as under :-

¶53

a. That, the land bearing Khasra No. 720 situated at village Tora is recorded in the name of School Education Department

¶54

¶55

after being received the same on donation by Tapi D/o. Klawati and accordingly the said land was mutated in the name of School Education. To demonstrate the above, copy of the Khasra Form -B is filed herewith as Annexure -A.

¶56

b. That, at Khasra No. 720 area 0.29 hectare, a Primary School building is already in existence as well as Anganbadi Bhawan and other rooms of School Education Department and being completely utilized for the said purpose only for the benefit of children of the said village.

¶57

c. That, under the MNREGA, an administrative sanction was accorded for construction of a Panchayat Bhawan in the said district including in village Tora Block Baramkela on the proposal made by the Gram Panchayat Tora vide order dated 04/06/2020 on certain conditions and one of the condition is that the work is to be carried on the land of the beneficiary. However, the Gram Panchayat Tora started raising construction at Khara No. 720 which is land recorded in the name of School Education Department.

¶58

d. That, when the raising construction of Panchayat Building in Khasra No. 720 came up, a report has been sought from the Tahsildar, Baramkela and in turn, the Naib Tahsildar, Baramkela submitted its report with respect to the status of the land and construction being carried out by the Gram Panchayat, Tora.

¶59

e. That, a report was also received from the Block Education Officer, Baramkela to the effect that Gram Panchayat Tora is raising construction of Panchayat Building in the school

¶60

¶61

premises and accordingly a recommendation was made to the effect that the said construction must be made outside the school premises which would be beneficial for the students. Copy of the report of Naib Tahsildar, Baramkela and Block Education Officer, Baramkela is collectively filed herewith as Annexure -B.

¶62

f. That, in the matter, vide order dated 17-9-2020 the Hon'ble Court, after hearing the parties, directed to maintain the status quo in the matter and in compliance of the order dated 17/09/2020 passed by the Hon'ble Court, necessary instructions were issued for compliance of the order of the Hon'ble Court upon which the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Baramkela vide order dated 18/09/2020, has directed the Gram Panchayat Tora not to raise any further construction.

¶63

g. That, the Gram Panchayat Tora has already raised half construction of Panchayat Building at ceiling level at Khasra No. 720. While as of now construction activities are completely restrained.

¶64

h. That, as neither any permission has been given by the School Education Department for raising such construction at Khasra No. 720 nor the School Education Department intends to change the purpose of law for which it is reserved and the same will always be utilized for the betterment of children and for school purposes only.

¶65

i. That, since the construction of building is at ceiling level raised by the Gram Panchayat Tora and School Education

¶66

¶67

Department does not intend to change the purpose of land, therefore, looking to the interest of children studying in the school, it would be appropriate to permit further construction to be raised so that the said building could be utilized for the purpose of school only.

¶68

That, the contents of this affidavit from paras 1 to 3 have been drafted according to my instruction and the contents thereof are true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge and belief, based on the official records.

¶69

DEPONENT

¶70

VERIFICATION

¶71

I, Bhim Singh, the above named deponent, do hereby verify that the contents of the above affidavit from para 1 to 3 are true to my personal knowledge and belief.

¶72

Verified and signed on 17-3-2021 at Raigarh/Bilaspur (CG)

¶73

IDENTIFIED BY ME DEPONENT”

¶74

7. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record with utmost circumspection.

¶75

8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that in compliance of the order of status-quo passed by this Court, construction work of Panchayat Bhavan has been stopped.

¶76

9. Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for respondents No. 1 to 4 & 7 would submit that in the return filed on behalf of respondent No. 8 and in affidavit filed by Collector, Raigarh, they have admitted that since impugned land, in which, Panchayat Bhavan is being

¶77

¶78

constructed, has been recorded in the name of School Education Department, therefore, now State Government has decided not to construct the impugned Panchayat Bhavan. But, if Court permits, the State Government is ready to complete the construction work of impugned building and, thereafter, that building will be handed over by the Government to the School Education Department for the use of School / students.

¶79

10. In view of above submissions and the return filed on behalf of the respondent No. 8 as well as affidavit of the Collector, Raigarh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners agreed that State Government may be permitted to complete the construction work of impugned building and, thereafter, it can be handed over to the School Education Department for the use of students of the School.

¶80

11. Considering the facts of the case and submissions made on behalf of the counsel for both the parties, we think it appropriate in the interest of students of the school to permit the State Government to complete the construction work of the impugned building and after completion of construction work, to hand over the same to the School Education Department for the use of students of School. Ordered accordingly.

¶81

12. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the WP (PIL) stands finally disposed of. No cost.

¶82

Sd/-	Sd/-
(Arup Kumar Goswami)	(N.K. Chandravanshi)
Chief Justice	Judge

¶83

Pathak / dubey -

Sita Ram Bisi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sita Ram Bisi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Juvenile in Conflict With Law Vs State of Chhattisgarh

X Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dayaram Ratre Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Jaymati Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lalit Pratap Singh Vs Union Of India

Omprakash Vs State of Chhattisgarh