Disposed

Chhattisgarh Sayunkt Kisan Morcha v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC13 Sept 2023WPPIL/13/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a PIL challenging alleged illegal encroachment and construction of a steel plant on government and public land, the High Court disposed of the petition. The Court held that the matter was being addressed by competent authorities and the government land allotment proposal was sub-judice, so no immediate interference was warranted.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed off with an observation that the petitioner can approach appropriate authorities for grievance redressal.

Chhattisgarh Sayunkt Kisan Morcha Vs State of… — Land Acquisition | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPPIL No. 13 of 2023

¶5

Chhattisgarh Sayunkt Kisan Morcha Through Its Office Secretary Mr. Ashok Kashyap, Having Its Office At Chhattisgarhi Bhawan, Thakur Pyarelal Singh Marg, Handipara, Police Station- Azad Chowk, Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh Through The Chief Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattiagarh.

¶9

State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Revenue and Disaster Management, Government of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Environment and Forest, Government of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

Collector Mahasamund Collectorate, Mahasamund, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

Sub Divisional Officer, (Revenue) Mahasamund, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.

¶13

Naib Tahsildaar Patewa, Mahasamund, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.

¶14

M/s Karnikriapa Power Private Limited Through Its Director - Nirnay Chaudary S/o Ashok Chaudary, Office Address - A-25, Jeevan Apartment, Shankar Nagar Road, Avanti Vihar Baisment, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶15

Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board (CECB) Through Its Member Secretary, Paryavaas Bhawan, North Block, Sector- 19, Atal Nagar, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. Pin Code- 492002

¶16

---- Respondents

¶17

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

¶18

For Petitioner	:	Mr. Himank Saluja, Advocate.
For Respondents/State	:	Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, Deputy Advocate General.
For Respondent No. 7	:	Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Ankur Agrawal, Advocate.
For Respondent No. 8	:	Mr. Abhijeet Mishra, Advocate.

¶19

¶20

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri N.K. Chandravanshi, Judge

¶21

Order on Board

¶22

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶23

13.09.2023

¶24

Heard Mr. Himank Saluja, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for respondents No. 1 to 6/State, Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Ankur Agrawal, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 7 and Mr. Abhijeet Mishra, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 8.

¶25

2. The present writ petition styled as public interest litigation has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:

¶26

“10.1 That Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records leading to filing of the present Public Interest Litigation.

¶27

10.2 That Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing Respondent State authorities to forthwith start the legal process against illegal usurpation of public property, encroachment and illegal construction thereon jeopardizing environment and large public interest and wealth of the State.

¶28

10.3 That Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus of any other appropriate writ restraining Respondent

¶29

¶30

KPP from proceeding their illegal construction without obtaining due sanctions and approval of competent authorities.

¶31

10.4 That Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing Respondent authorities to prepare a demarcation report with respect to the land proposed to be used by Respondent KPP.

¶32

10.5 That such other relief(s) and direction may be granted as Hon’ble the High Court may think fit to protect the public.”

¶33

3. Mr. Himank Saluja, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an association of Adivasi Farmers and they are residents of State of Chhattisgarh. The petitioner has been raising his voice against the subject matter herein, however, the authorities have been paying no heed to the requests/objections. The petitioner has filed this petition at its own cost and expenses and not at the instance of some other person. No other petition of the same nature or involving the same issue has either been filed before this Court nor is pending.

¶34

4 . Mr. Saluja submits that the respondent-Karnikripa Power Private Limited (for short, ‘KPP’) is proposing to establish a Steel Plant at Khairjhitti & Koajhar Villages, Mahasamund Tehsil & District Chhattisgarh. That total land identified for the proposed project is 50.57 Ha. (124.95 acres). It is submitted that estimated project cost for the proposed project is Rs. 900 crores approximately. The land which has been proposed to use by the KPP is 124.95 acres which comprises of not only his private land, but several lands which is agricultural land, Government land and forest land

¶35

¶36

that has been encroached by the KPP for his private purpose. The respondent-KPP has started construction over the land in question without following the due process of law and without obtaining sanctions from concerned authorities making the construction of the KPP completely illegal.

¶37

5. Mr. Saluja would further submits that the respondent-KPP filed an application for allotment of government land before the Nayab Tahsildar for land bearing Khasra Nos. 996, 1020, 1023/2, 1025, 1046, 1101 and 1102, when the objections were called almost 150 Adivasi Farmers filed an objection against the allotment of government land to respondent-KPP specifically mentioning that no permission has been taken by the respondent-KPP from concerned Gram Panchayat and also mentioned that land near by the proposed plant is agricultural land where day to day farming is done by the farmers and they fulfill their basic necessities of life by farming also stated that if the land is allotted to respondent-KPP it will greatly affect the day to day life of farmers. He also submits that it was also bought to the knowledge of the Nayab Tahsildar that pollutants that will be generated by the respondent-KPP will completely destroy the farms, rivers and environment of the Khairjhitti & Koajhar village.

¶38

6 . It is further submitted by Mr. Saluja that the respondent-KPP applied for diversion of lands for use of land for industrial purpose bearing Khasra Nos. 1017, 10182/2, 1030, 1023/1, 1027/1, 1029, 1032/2, 1032/3, 1033/2, 1034, 1034, 1037, 1045/5, 1045/6 and 1045/7 area 0.60, 0.54, 0.20, 0.67, 0.54, 1.11, 1.35, 0.03, 0.40, 1.2111, 1.20, 1.31, 0.94, 1.12, 0.10 hectare, total Khasra No. 15, total area 11.32 hectare situated at Village Khairjhitti, P.H. No. 6, Tahsil and District Mahasamund. The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Mahamamund registered this application as E-Court Case

¶39

¶40

No.202205/20300027. He further submitted that objection were raised by 150 adivasi farmers against the diversion of said lands for industrial purpose. The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) passed a final order dated 23.09.2022 in a completely technical manner and without application of mind as the report presented by the Revenue Inspector, Sirpur suggested firstly that the said lands proposed by the respondent-KPP falls within the limit of 5 km of Municipal area and also stated that within 10 meters radius of land in question the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. pipeline has been passed.

¶41

7. Mr. Saluja also submits that the Patwari of P.H. No. 6 conducted a spot enquiry which was presented before the Sub Divisional Oficer in which it was stated that Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. pipeline has been passed from underground in the said land. The Sub Divisional Officer committed a gross illegality by presuming a letter dated 23.08.2021 of Gram Panchayat which was relating to conversion of agricultural land for industrial purpose of respondent-KPP as No-objection Certificate (NOC) and this letter of Gram Panchayat was opted as NOC, thus, Sub Divisional Officer passed an order diverting the said land in a complete hush-hush manner just for favoring respondent-KPP.

¶42

8. Mr. Saluja further submits that an appeal under Section 44 of Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 has been preferred by the Officer Secretary of petitioner’s organization before the Collector, District Mahasamund which is still pending before the Collector which was supported by the objection raised by the almost 150 farmers against the diversion of the land for industrial use by respondent-KPP putting their signature in the objection form before the Collector. He also submits that in the middle of the land and adjoining land which claimed by the respondent-

¶43

¶44

KPP as private land lies various government lands which are encroached by the respondent-KPP for his private purpose. The whole construction site which is approx 125 acres consists of the various land encroached by the respondent-KPP. He also submits that the respondents authorities has committed gross illegality while passing order of allotment and Diversion of government land just for benefiting private respondent without entertaining any objection or doing an enquiry with this regard.

¶45

9. On the other hand, Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for respondents No. 1 to 6/State submits that the entire allegation as framed and raised by the petitioner against the respondents/State is devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed at threshold, for the reason that no such government land has, yet been allotted to the respondent No. 7 and the construction of proposed steel plant is on the land which was purchased by the respondent No. 7 from the villagers and not on government land. He further submits that the present Public Interest Litigation itself deserves to be dismissed for want of locus of the petitioner as the petitioner describe themselves to be the society, however, the petitioner has not filed any such document showing the registration of the society and the authorization by the said authority to its Office Secretary, Mr. Ashok Kashyap to file this present writ petition in the form of ‘Public Interest Litigation’, and therefore, on this count alone the present writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶46

10. It is further submitted by Mr. Ahluwalia that respondent No. 7 has applied for the diversion of land for the industrial purpose, the detail of those lands are as follows, Khasra Nos. 1017, 1018/2, 1030, 1023/1, 1027/1, 1029, 1032/2, 1032/3, 1033/2, 1035, 1034, 1034, 1037, 1045/5, 1045/7 total area which is around 11.14 hectare (27.53 acres) and the

¶47

¶48

diversion of land is done as per order dated 23.09.2022 and challenging the said diversion order, the present petitioner (Ashok Kashyap) has filed the appeal under Section 44 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code. However, the said application was not registered for the reason that himself was not coming and appearing before the Collector, Mahasamund for registering his case under Section 44 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code. He also submits that another case was filed by one Shri Ashwant Tushar Sahu along with other persons challenging the order of diversion which was registered by the Additional Collector as Case No.202205120300027/1202, Mahasamund on 23.01.2023.

¶49

11. Mr. Ahluwalia further submits that the total land in which the plant is situated is reflected through the spot map prepared by the Patwari Halka No. 7, RNM, Sirpur, Tehsil and District Mahasamund (copy of which is being annexed as Annexure R/2 in the writ petition) and in this entire map (according to missal records dated 1991 and current revenue records) the green colour lands are shown as government land, light yellow colour lands are shown as lands in which the construction activity of the respondent No.7 is going on, orange colour reflects the land of private persons which belongs to non tribal communities and pink colour reflects land of private persons belongs to tribal communities and red colour mark is shown to be the boundary wall of the property of respondent No. 7, blue colour mark reflects wired fencing boundary, dotted black line marks are reflected as the road for approaching the government land Khasra No. 1038. He also submits that although, the government land which is reflected with the green colour, were earlier included in the plant boundary of the respondent No. 7, however, after getting the knowledge of the same the entire exercise was done, notices were issued and now the said land was separately

¶50

¶51

earmarked and safeguarded from the respondent No. 7 possession. As per the map, the road which is separately marked with black colour has been specifically made in the land of the respondent No. 7 by the indulgence of the State Government authority so that, the land can be used by the State Government. He further states that at this juncture, as of now there is no such encroachment over the government land and also it is admitted that these government land are in the vicinity of the respondent No. 7 total area, but now the same stands protected by segregating the government land by creating fencing over the said government land and by creating approach roads for the same from private land of respondent No. 7.

¶52

12. Mr. Ahluwalia also submits that the Director of Industrial Department bearing letter No. dzekad@206@v/kksfod@Hkw-v-@2021@7719 jk;iqj] fnukad 06@05@2022] Chhattisgarh has applied for allotment of the government land bearing Khasra Nos. 996, 1020, 1023/2, 1024, 1025, 1038, 1046 and 1101 and it is the same land which is reflected in the spot map falls within the vicinity of the respondent No. 7. However, as of now the same land was protected by making a separate road and fencing over that land and as of now, the allotment process of the said land is also pending sub-judice before the State Government.

¶53

13. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

¶54

14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as the issue involved in the present case, which has been brought to the notice by the petitioner through public interest litigation, is being taken care of by the competent authorities and the government lands which were earlier within the vicinity of the total boundary wall of the respondent No. 7, but now the same is protected by fencing it from the other lands and so far as relates to

¶55

¶56

the allotment of the government land is concerned, the said proposal is still sub-judice before the State Government and no final decision was taken by the State Government with regard to the said proposal and therefore, we are not inclined to keep the matter pending.

¶57

15 . Resultantly, the present writ petition styled as ‘Public Interest Litigation’ is disposed off .

¶58

16. Leaving it open for the petitioner to avail remedy to approach appropriate authority for redressal of grievance, if they are aggrieved by the act of the State or of the respondent No. 7.

¶59

Sd/- Sd/- (N.K. Chandravanshi) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶60

Brijmohan

Chhattisgarh Sayunkt Kisan Morcha v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhattisgarh Sayunkt Kisan Morcha 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

Balraj Makhija Vs Shiv Ram Allu Bhandar And Anr.

Smt. Gayatri Dewangan Vs Dharmendra Dewangan and Ors.

Mohit Agarwal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Triveni Verma Vs Domar Singh Counhan

Shakti Singh Vs Dhenu Bag Yadav

Janki Devi Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh