Ambika Prasad Dewangan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:11359

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 2030 of 2015

¶6

1 - Ambika Prasad Dewangan S/o Late Dwarika Nath Dewangan, Aged About 51 Years R/o Baigapara, Near Shitla Mandir, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

¶10

2 - Director, Public Instructions, Directorate, Chhattisgarh, Pension Bada, Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶11

3 District Education Officer, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

4 - Principal, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Selud, Tahsil Patan, District Durg Chhattisgarh

¶13

5 - Collector/ Land Acquisition Officer, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶14

Digitally signed by SHYNA SHYNA AJAY AJAY Date:2025.03.07 16:32:38 +0530

¶15

... Respondent(s)

¶16

2

¶17

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. H.B. Agarwal, Senior Advocate with Ms. A. Sandhya Rao, Advocate For Respondent(s) / : Mr. Dilman Rati Minj, Government Advocate and State Mr. T.S. Sahu, Panel Lawyer

¶18

SB.: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board

¶19

07/03/2025

¶20

By way of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to conclude the acquisition proceedings as the said authorities without any due course of law have encroached upon 0.03 hectare land out of the land bearing Khasra No.122/1, area 0.17 hectare, situated in Village Selud, Patwari Halka No.27, Tehsil Patan, District Durg without any acquisition of the same.

¶21

At the outset, learned counsel for the State would submit that an affidavit has been filed on 7.10.2024 by the Officer In-charge of the case. In the said affidavit, it has been categorically stated that the encroachment site has been completely separated by fencing on 31.7.2023 and there is no construction on the said controversial site nor the School has ever taken any benefit from it. Further, the tree plantation work was also done on the site and accordingly, the petitioner/land owner has been informed that he is free to use it. He would submit that the encroachment was removed and no permanent structure was erected.

¶22

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the

¶23

3

¶24

petitioner cannot be deprived of his property under Article 300A of the Constitution of India without due procedure of law. Since the respondent authorities have utilised the land of the petitioner for a substantial period, a suitable compensation and rent may be fixed for such unauthorised use. Learned counsel for the petitioner would draw attention of the Court towards the letter sent by the District Education Officer, Durg dated 11.8.2015 to the Director, Public Education Directorate, wherein, it has been stated that in the subject land, a school has been constructed. He submits that after more than 10 years, without any acquisition, an affidavit has been filed by the State in the year 2024 to the effect that the subject land has been vacated and separated by fencing on 31.7.2023. He would submit that if the State is not inclined to acquire the subject land, a suitable compensation may be awarded to the petitioner for such use of the land by the respondent authorities.

¶25

Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed with the petition carefully.

¶26

An affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents/State stating evidently therein that it had encroached the land of the petitioner though it has also been stated that no permanent structure has been erected on the subject land and only plantation was done. However, now, the said encroachment site has been completely separated by fencing on 31.7.2023.

¶27

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also considering the affidavit filed by the State and further considering that in respect of an area of 0.03 hectare, the present writ petition has been filed and lastly, considering the use availed on the subject land by the

¶28

4

¶29

respondent authorities , this Court deems it appropriate to award a compensation to the tune of Rs.25,000/- to the petitioner subject to furnishing a No Objection Certificate in the form an affidavit from the other account holders of the subject land, which shall be paid by the respondents jointly and severally within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, the petitioner would be entitled for the interest @ 12% per annum till its realisation from the date of passing of this order. Ordered accordingly.

¶30

Accordingly, this Petition stands disposed of.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari)

¶33

Judge

¶34

Shyna

Ambika Prasad Dewangan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambika Prasad Dewangan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dashrath Satnami Vs Ghasiram And Ors.

Balchand Oswal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Savitri Bai Vs Priya Bai @ Priliya Bai

Digambar Gir Vs Keshar Prasad And Anr.

Shyamlal and Anr. Vs Kaushilya Bai and Ors.

S.B.I. General Insurance Company Limited Vs Smt. Neera Devi Yadav