Rajesh Kumar Gupta Vs The State Of Chhattisgarh

¶1

Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.02.24 11:19:43 +0530

1

2026:CGHC:9370

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPC No. 2943 of 2016

¶7

Rajesh Kumar Gupta S/o Late Shiv Prasad Gupta, Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Pondidih, Tahsil Khadgawa, Distt. Koriya Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Petitioner(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

¶11

The Collector, Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

¶12

Sub Divisional Officer Revenue, Chirmiri, Distt. Koriya Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

¶13

The Tahsildar, Tahsil Office Khadgawa, Distt. Koriya Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

¶14

Tilakdev Prasad Gupta, Contractor, Chando Road, In Front Of M.P. Banglow, Balrampur, Distt. Balrampur Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh

¶15

Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Distt. Koriya Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

¶16

For Petitioner	: Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate
For State	: Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, G.A.

¶17

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶18

Judgment On Board

¶19

2

¶20

23.2.2026

¶21

1) It is informed that respondent No. 5, namely, Tilakdev Prasad Gupta – the contractor who completed the construction work of school premises has died during pendency of this petition.

¶22

2) At this stage, Mr. Pushkar Sinha, counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No. 5 has already completed the construction work and his legal representatives are not necessary party for adjudication of this case.

¶23

3) Accordingly, at the peril of Mr. Sinha, no order is being passed for substitution of legal representatives of deceased respondent No. 5 and with the consent of parties, matter is heard finally.

¶24

4) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner’s land bearing Khasra No. 311 ad-measuring 2.20 hectares situated at Village Podidih, P.H. No. 10, Tehsil – Khadgawa, District – Koriya (C.G.) has been used by the State authorities for construction of school premises without acquisition of land and payment of compensation. He further submits that a representation was made before Collector, Koriya on 26.8.2015 but till date no decision has been taken. He prays for a direction to respondent authorities to decide the pending representation at the earliest.

¶25

5) On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that a notice was issued by concerned Tehsildar to the petitioner herein to appear on 4.3.2016 but petitioner failed to appear, therefore no

¶26

3

¶27

decision has been taken yet. He further submits that petitioner has approached this Court at belated stage without explaining the delay part therefore this petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶28

6) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record.

¶29

7) Taking into consideration the allegations leveled in the writ petition and the notice issued by Tehsildar, Khadgawa requiring the presence of petitioner, this petition at this juncture is hereby being disposed directing the concerned Collector to adjudicate the matter and take appropriate steps preferably within period of six months from today.

¶30

8) It is expected that if it is found that land of petitioner has been used for construction of school premises, appropriate steps shall be taken by State authorities with regard to acquisition of land and payment of compensation.

¶31

9) With the aforesaid direction(s), this petition stands disposed . It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of case.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE

¶34

A j i n k y a

Rajesh Kumar Gupta v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar Gupta v. The 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ruksana Bibi Vs Abdulla Khan

Harivansh Dubey and Ors. Vs State Of C.g. and Ors.

Gmmco Limited Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Devprasad Sai Vs Santu Ram Chouhan

Smt. Renu Devi Vs Nirbhay Kumar Mehta

Deenanath (Dead) through Lrs. (Om Prakash Gupta) Vs Durga Prasad