Disposed

Harilal v. (Deleted) Ambalgan P Secretary

Chhattisgarh HC23 Feb 2023CONT/12/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt petition alleging non-compliance of an order determining interest on land acquisition, the court held the respondent complied by quantifying the claim and referring it for fund release. The petition was disposed of without further relief pending fund allotment. Quality is thin.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; right reserved to approach again if fund allotment is not made to release the quantified amount.

Harilal Vs (Deleted) Ambalgan P… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶2

Order Sheet

¶3

CONT No. 12 of 2023

¶4

Harilal S/o Gulab Uraon Aged About 37 Years Caste Schedule Tribe, Resident Of Village Heerapur, Tehsil Dabhara, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 04 In The Writ Petition No. 652/2022)

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

(Deleted) Ambalgan P Secretary As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 09.01.2023.

¶8

(Deleted) Taran Prakash Sinha As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 09.01.2023.

¶9

(Deleted) Nupur Rashi Panna As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 09.01.2023.

¶10

(Deleted) A.K.Somawar As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 09.01.2023.

¶11

(Deleted) Indrajeet Uike As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 09.01.2023.

¶12

Divya Agrawal Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Dabhara, District Sakti Chhattisgarh

¶13

(Deleted) Sushil Gupta As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated 09.01.2023.

¶14

	---- Respondents
23/02/2023	Mr. Hariom Rai, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Vijay K. Deshmukh, counsel for the respondent/s. The present contempt petition has been filed alleging non compliance of the order dated 17.02.2022 passed in WPC No.652 of 2022. The operative part of the order passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition reads as under :- “7. Be that as it may, let the petitioners again approach the respondent No.3 by way of a suitable representation within a period of 30 days seeking for interest from the date the actual possession was taken from the petitioners, till date the award was

---- Respondents

23/02/2023

Mr. Hariom Rai, counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Vijay K. Deshmukh, counsel for the respondent/s.
The present contempt petition has been filed alleging non
compliance of the order dated 17.02.2022 passed in WPC No.652 of 2022.
The operative part of the order passed by this Court in the aforesaid
writ petition reads as under :-
“7. Be that as it may, let the petitioners again approach the
respondent No.3 by way of a suitable representation within a
period of 30 days seeking for interest from the date the actual
possession was taken from the petitioners, till date the award was

¶15

passed. Upon such representation being made, the respondent No.3 shall take an appropriate decision strictly in accordance with law and also taking note of the judgment of the Supreme Court referred to in the preceding paragraph at the earliest preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of representation of the petitioners.”
Mr. Vijay Deshmukh, Counsel appearing for the respondent no.3
has produced a document dated 29.12.2022 whereby the respondents
after constituting the Committee has determined the claim of the petitioners
in six writ petitions of similar nature who were claiming interest from the
date of possession being taken by the respondents till the date of award.
The dispute in the petition was only so far as interest from the date
of possession having been taken till the date of award. Subsequent to the award the interest has already been paid to the respective individuals.
Respondent no.3 vide order dated 29.12.2022 passed an order in favour of
the petitioners holding them to be entitled for the interest from the date of
possession. The amount payable also has been quantified and matter
stands referred to the higher authorities in the department seeking for
release of fund to the petitioners.
Taking into consideration the stand of the respondents, particularly,
the respondent no.3 who has allowed the claim of the petitioner and has
decided the entitlement part and quantum of payment payable, this Court
is of the opinion that part to be executed by the respondent no.3 stands
duly complied with. However, in case if petitioners have till date not been
able to reap the fruits of the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer the
recourse available to the petitioner would be by availing fresh petition with

¶16

Rohit	appropriate directions to the respondent State for making allotment of necessary funds to be released towards compliance of the order passed by the Land Acquisition Officer in the instant case dated 29.12.2022. Reserving the right of the petitioner to avail such benefits and relief the present contempt petition as of now stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge

Harilal v. (Deleted) Ambalgan P Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harilal v. (Deleted) Ambalgan P Secretary

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

Mayaram Nat Vs Neelam Namdeo Ekka

Sanjay Sonwani Vs Shri Arun Kumar Verma

Suraj Prasad Auchagalle Vs a. K. Behra

Shrikant Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kriparam Patel Vs Shri Kamalpreet Singh

Kamal Singh Bariha Vs Shri Kamalpreet Singh