Shivkumar Sahu Vs Manish Sahu — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Shivkumar Sahu Vs Manish Sahu — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respondent directed to pay Rs.26,536/- to the petitioner upon his appearance before the respondent on 29th July, 2026, after following due process; rule discharged and contempt proceeding dropped, with no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent failed to comply with the Order dated 27.02.2025 passed in WPC No.5522/2024, such that contempt proceedings should continue against him.

Court's answer

On the respondent's explanation that NHAI had deposited only Rs.26,536/- (the value of the katcha tiled house) out of the Rs.53,072/- awarded by the supplementary award dated 22.02.2021, the court directed the respondent to pay that amount to the petitioner, who was to be presented before the respondent on 29th July, 2026, payment to be made after following due process.

Ratio / Principle

The rule issued in the contempt petition was discharged and the contempt proceeding was dropped, with no order as to costs.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt petition (CONT No. 1237 of 2025, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur) by Shivkumar Sahu against Manish Sahu, Competent Authority (Land Acquisition)/SDO (Rev), Bilaspur, alleging non-compliance of the order dated 27.02.2025 passed in WPC No.5522/2024 concerning payment of additional land-acquisition compensation. The respondent, present in person, explained that although a supplementary award dated 22.02.2021 had awarded Rs.53,072/- as additional compensation, NHAI objected that the petitioner had constructed a tiled roof (khappraposh) house on Government land and was therefore not entitled to solatium but only to the value of the katcha tiled house, i.e. Rs.26,536/-, which alone NHAI had deposited. The court directed the respondent to pay Rs.26,536/- to the petitioner upon his presentation before the respondent on 29th July, 2026, after following due process; the rule issued was discharged, the contempt proceeding was dropped, and there was no order as to costs. (Judgment of Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, dated 20.07.2026.)

1

CGHC010333332025

2026:CGHC:30654

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

CONT No. 1237 of 2025

Shivkumar Sahu S/o Shri Manbodh Sahu Aged About 47 Years R/o House No. 4/ 1, Musalman Para, Village And Gram Panchayat Salfa, Tehsil Pathariya, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioner/Applicant

versus

Manish Sahu Competent Authority Land Acquisition And Sub Divisional Officer (Rev) Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent

For Petitioner	: Mr. Syed Afaque Hu	ssain Rizvi, Advocate
For Respondent	: Present in person Advocate General	along with Mr. DR Minj, Dy.

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

Order on Board

20.07.2026

1. Heard.

2. This contempt petition has been filed alleging non-compliance of Order dated 27.02.2025 passed in WPC No.5522/2024 (Annexure-C/1).

3. At the outset, respondent, who is present in person, submits that though vide supplementary award dated 22.02.2021, an amount of Rs.53,072/- was awarded as additional compensation to the petitioner/ applicant, but, the National Highway Authority of India raised an objection on

Digitally signed by BINI BINI PRADEEP PRADEEP Date: 2026.07.21 10:54:14 +0530

2

the ground that that the petitioner has constructed a tiled roof house ( khappraposh makan ) on Government land, therefore, he is not entitled to get solatium on the said amount, rather he is only entitled to get value of katcha tiled house i.e. Rs.26,536/-. It is further submitted that on account of above, NHAI has only deposited an amount of Rs.26,536/- in respect of supplementary award dated 22.02.2021. The respondent further submits that he is still ready to pay the aforesaid amount of compensation i.e. Rs.26,536/deposited by the NHAI to the petitioner.

4. In view of the above, the respondent is directed to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs. Rs.26,536/- to the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to make present the petitioner before the respondent on 29^th July, 2026. In the eventuality of the appearance of the petitioner, the respondent is directed to pay the amount of compensation to him after following the due process.

6. Accordingly, the rule issued is discharged and contempt proceeding is dropped. No order as to costs.

Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

Bini