Smt. Shanti Bai Vs Union of India — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Smt. Shanti Bai Vs Union of India — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner permitted to file an application before the concerned Tehsildar for rectification/modification of the revenue records; authorities directed to pass an appropriate order strictly on the basis of original revenue records within 90 days; liberty reserved to the petitioner to take appropriate steps if her land is found to have been used for construction of the National Highway.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's land (Survey No. 114/2, admeasuring 0.142 hectare, Village Banjari, District Korba), allegedly omitted from the National Highways survey list and notification despite purported use for highway construction, entitles her to compensation or return of the land. +1 more

Court's answer

If it is found that the petitioner's land has been used for the construction of the National Highway, the petitioner would be at liberty to take appropriate steps.

Ratio / Principle

Taking into account the clerical mistake in the revenue records observed by the Tehsildar in his memo dated 26.05.2018, the petitioner is permitted to file an application before the concerned Tehsildar for rectification/modification of the revenue records, and the authorities are directed to pass an appropriate order strictly on the basis of the original revenue records.

Key takeaways

The entire exercise (consideration of the petitioner's application and passing of the appropriate order) shall be completed preferably within a period of 90 days.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (WPC No. 28 of 2019, decided 05.05.2025; Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J.) — Land acquisition/National Highways — Petitioner's land (Survey No. 114/2, 0.142 hectare, Village Banjari, Tehsil Katghora, District Korba) was, per her submission, not included in the National Highways survey list nor in the notification issued by the NHAI during settlement; she sought mandamus for compensation in lieu of her land under the National Highways Act or return of the land. Respondents contended the land had not been acquired and no compensation was due. The Court, noting the clerical mistake in the revenue records observed by the Tehsildar in his memo dated 26.05.2018, permitted the petitioner to file an application before the concerned Tehsildar for rectification/modification of the revenue records and directed the authorities to pass an appropriate order strictly on the basis of the original revenue records, the entire exercise to be completed preferably within 90 days; if the land is found to have been used for construction of the National Highway, the petitioner is at liberty to take appropriate steps. Writ petition disposed of.

-1-

2025:CGHC:20415

NAFR

HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPC No. 28 of 2019

1 - Smt. Shanti Bai D/o Shri Surjan Ram Aged About 41 Years Caste Urao, R/o Village Banjari, Tehsil- Katghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

... Petitioner

versus

1 - Union of India Through Secretary of Ministry of Road, Transport And Highways Government of India, New Delhi., District : New Delhi, Delhi.

2 - National Highway Authority of India Through Its Project Director, National Highway No. 111 (New N.H.-130), Bilaspur-Ambikapur Section (By-Pass), District- Korba, Chhattisgarh.

3 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Naya Raipur/atal Nagar, Disrtict- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

4 - The Collector Korba, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh.

5 - Competent Authority-Cum-Sub Divisional officer (Revenue And Land Acquisition officer), Katghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s)

(Cause Title is taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Patel, Advocate For Union of India : Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan, Central Government Counsel For State : Mr. Pramod Ramteke, Panel Lawyer

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order on Board

-2-

05.05.2025

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-

“10.1 It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ against the respondents direct them to grant the petitioner Ол 1956 or return the land of the petitioner after excavating the compensation in lieu of her land under National Highways Act, construction of road.

10.2 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit. ”

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the land of the petitioner, bearing Survey No. 114/2, admeasuring 0.142 hectare, situated at Village Banjari, District Korba, was not included in the survey list of the National Highways and during the course of settlement, the said land was also not included in the notification issued by the National Highways Authority. He further submits that a direction may be issued to the concerned Tehsildar to pass an appropriate order, and the petitioner may be permitted to submit an application before the concerned authorities.

He also submits that according to the memo issued by the Office of the Tehsildar particularly Clause 7, the Tehsildar may be directed to rectify the revenue record.

1. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents opposes the submission made by counsel for the petitioner and submits that the land of petitioner has not been acquired by the National Highways Authority. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for any compensation.

-3-

1. Taking into consideration the fact that there is a clerical mistake in the revenue records as observed by the Tehsildar in the memo dated 26.05.2018, the petitioner is permitted to file an application before the concerned Tehsildar for rectification/modification of the revenue records. The authorities are accordingly directed to pass an appropriate order strictly on the basis of original revenue records.

1. The entire exercise shall be completed preferably within a period 90 days.

1. If it is found that the land of the petitioner has been used for the construction of

the National Highway, the petitioner would be at liberty to take appropriate steps.

1. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), the writ petition stands disposed of . Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)

Judge

NADIM