Quashed

Rajesh Agrawal v. Ms. Alka Upadhyay

Chhattisgarh HC13 Jan 2023CONT/1008/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge of the Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed a writ petition filed for contempt proceedings against respondents in a land acquisition dispute. Finding that the respondent had complied with a prior directive conducted a fresh demarcation, the Court discharged the rule, dropped contempt proceedings, and recalled a bailable warrant against the Project Director.

What did the court decide?

The rule was discharged, the contempt proceedings were dropped, the bailable warrant was recalled, and the interim application was disposed of. The petitioner was at liberty to challenge the demarcati

Rajesh Agrawal Vs Ms. Alka Upadhyay — Contempt of Court | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CONT No. 1008 of 2022

¶5

Rajesh Agrawal S/o Late Shri Baijnath Agrawal Aged About 56 Years R/o 705, Sunder Nagar, Raipur, District And Tehsil Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Ms. Alka Upadhyay Chairman, National Highway Authority Of India, Corporate Office At F-5 And 6, Sector 10, Dwarika, New Delhi 110075.

¶9

Shri Narendra Singh Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, Raipur, House No. 5196, Behind B.I.T. College, Shankar Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶10

Shri Dvendra Patel Land Acquisition Officer Cum S D M, Raipur, District And Tehsil Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶11

Shri Ajay Chandravanshi Tehsildar, Dharsiwa, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶12

Shri Pramod Gupta Nayab Tehsildar, Dharsiva, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶13

---- Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr. Abhyuday Singh, Advocate. For Res. No. 2 :Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocate

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

¶16

Order on Board.

¶17

13-01-2023.

¶18

This Court vide its order dated 05.01.2023 has directed for issuance of bailable warrant against the respondent No. 2 for a sum of Rs. 10,000/-, thereafter, the matter was urgently mentioned by the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 for hearing, therefore, the matter is taken- up today for hearing.

¶19

The return has already been filed by the respondent No. 2, in which, he has specifically stated that order dated 13.04.2022 passed by this Court in W.P. (C) No. 910 of 2022 has been complied with and representation filed by the petitioner has been rejected.

¶20

¶21

This Court vide its order dated 13.04.2022 in W.P. (C) No. 910 of 2022 has passed the following directions, which reads as under: “5.Considered on the submissions. As there are rival submissions regarding the second demarcation that has been conducted in the year 2021, however, it appears that the issue can be resolved by conducting a fresh demarcation in which both the parties shall be required to remain present to ascertain the area of the land of the petitioner, which has been utilized for construction of National Highway. Therefore, this petition is disposed off. The respondents are directed consider on the representation filed by the petitioner dated 13.01.2022, if necessary, conduct a fresh demarcation, in which the presence of the petitioner and the respondent concerned shall be ensured. If the out come of this demarcation favours the petitioner, then the respondents shall be at liberty to either acquire the excess land of the petitioner, which may be found to have been utilized for construction of National Highway or to vacate the same in favour of the petitioner. The direction given by this Court shall be complied by the respondents within a time limit of 120 days.”

¶22

In pursuance of the aforesaid direction given by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, the concerned respondent authority has conducted a fresh demarcation in respect of subject property, but still the petitioner is not satisfied with the same.

¶23

Admittedly, the decision which was required to be taken by the respondents authorities pursuant to the above order dated 13.04.2022 has already been taken and thus, the respondents have complied the order passed by this court. Respondent No. 2 has also filed his reply along with affidavit.

¶24

In view of the fact that respondent No. 2 has complied the order of this court, I do not find any reason to proceed further in the matter initiating contempt proceeding against the respondents.

¶25

¶26

Accordingly, the rule is discharged and contempt proceeding is dropped. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the same before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

¶27

With this observation, the contempt petition is disposed of.

¶28

The bailable warrant issued against the respondent No. 2 is hereby recalled. In view of above, the application(I.A. No. 01/2023) stands disposed of.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

¶31

amita

Rajesh Agrawal v. Ms. Alka Upadhyay

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Agrawal v. Ms. Alka Upadhyay

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

Ram Prasad @ Kallu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ishwar Sonkar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramsharan Sahu Vs Shri Keshar Parag

Latel Ram and Ors. Vs State

Annuram @ Anturam Naag Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kriparam Bhardwaj Vs State