Disposed

Ashwani Kumar Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC11 Jul 2023WPC/1258/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court examined a writ petition seeking compensation for land allegedly acquired for a canal. The court observed that the primary land was transferred via a registered sale deed, precluding relief on that aspect. However, it directed the Sub Divisional Officer to decide a separate application regarding a different plot within an irrigation colony within six months.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No. 3 to pass an appropriate order on the petitioner's application dated 07.01.2018 regarding the land in the irrigation colony within six months.

Ashwani Kumar Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Land Acquisition | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Order Reserved on 04.07.2023

¶5

Order Delivered on 11.07.2023

¶6

WPC No. 1258 of 2019

¶7

Ashwani Kumar Singn S/o Let Kumudeshwar Singh Aged About 59 Years R/o Village Janjgir, Tahsil Janjgir District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶8

---- Petitioner

¶9

Versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

Office Of Executive Engineer Hasdev Canal Water Resource Divisional Janjgir District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶12

Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum-Competent, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶13

Tahsildar Janjgir District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶14

Collector Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶15

---- Respondents

¶16

______________________________________________________________ For Petitioner : Mr. C.K. Kesharwani, Advocate For State : Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Govt. Advocate

¶17

S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

¶18

CAV Order

¶19

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following

¶20

reliefs:-

¶21

“ 10.1.That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly

¶22

-2-

¶23

be pleased to call for entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner and determination of awarded amount as per rule.

¶24

10.2. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing to respondent competent authority to make a payment of award amount as determined as per rule of the canal department revenue.

¶25

10.3. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No. 3 to red-decide after enquiry the petitioner's application which is consideration.

¶26

10.4 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award amount of the cost of the petition may be given. ”

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is owner of the land bearing kh. No.2736 situated in VillageJanjgir, Tahsil- Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa. The said land of the petitioner was acquired by the State Govt. for construction of canal. Petitioner has not received any amount of compensation and the application submitted by him was decided on 15.01.2019 after about 35 years. On the date of acquisition, petitioner was minor and the entire amount of compensation has been paid to one of the co-owner of the land. Petitioner was not

¶28

-3-

¶29

provided any document as to on what basis award amount has been calculated. It is also contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the application submitted by the petitioner on 07.01.2018 has not been considered and decided, kh.No.2736/2 admeasuring 0.20 acres recorded in the name of petitioner in revenue records is already within the residential colony of Irrigation Department, but the compensation has not been paid to him of the said land. It is submitted that as the application submitted by the petitioner in the year 2013 before respondent No.3 has not been decided till date, a direction be issued to respondent No.3 to pass order on his application.

¶30

Learned counsel for respondents/State submitted that the petitioner has not elaborated and demonstrated the area of land bearing kh. No.2736 which was acquired for the purpose of canal in the year 1986. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the sale deed was executed by Babu Singh of the land bearing kh. No.2736 measuring 0.60 acres (60 decimal) for agreed consideration of Rs.31,600/- on 09.01.1986. In the application submitted by the petitioner before SDO, the description of the property is mentioned as kh. No.2736/2 admeasuring 0.20 acres of land. As the land bearing kh. No.2736 admeasuring 0.60 acres is transferred through registered sale deed, no relief as prayed for by the petitioner can be granted.

¶31

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

¶32

-4-

¶33

documents annexed along with writ petition.

¶34

From perusal of the sale deed annexed along with reply would show that it is the registered sale deed executed by Babu Singh, S/o Ramkrishna of land bearing Kh. No.2736 admeasuring 0.60 acres vide registered sale deed 9.1.1986. The name of father of petitioner is Kumudeshwar Singh. Document annexed along with Annexure P-2 would show the names of Babu Singh, Kamudeshwwar Singh, Nanak Singh S/o Ramkrishna Singh as also Menka Bai W/o Ramkrishna Singh along with others and khasra numbers mentioned therein are 2738/1, 2736/7, 2736, 4553/1. Kh. No.2736 is transferred not under the land acquisition proceedings but through registered sale deed and in the facts of the case, petitioner, if is aggrieved by the manner in which the sale deed is executed, is having other remedy under the law.

¶35

So far as the application submitted by the petitioner on 07.01.2018 pleading that land bearing kh. No.2736/2 admeasuring 0.20 acres has also come in Irrigation Colony which is recorded in the name of Kumedeshwar Singh in revenue records and is not part of the sale deed is concerned, respondent No.3 is directed to pass appropriate orders on the application submitted by the petitioner on 07.01.2018 after verifying the facts, scrutiny of records in accordance with law and if required demarcating the disputed land. Respondent No.3 shall complete the said exercise within the period of six months

¶36

-5-

¶37

from the date of receipt of the order.

¶38

With the aforementioned observation and direction writ petition

¶39

stands disposed of.

¶40

Sd/---/-/-/-/--------/--/-

¶41

(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶42

Praveen

Ashwani Kumar Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashwani Kumar Singh 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

Shriram Paikra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bishambhar Dayal Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Benedik Khalkho Vs South East Central Railway

Ram Kumar Tiwari Vs Smt. Shikha Rajput Tiwari

Mohan Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rachna Suryawanshi (in Person) Vs State of Chhattisgarh through Principal Secretary