Disposed¶34

Aashish Kumar Dewangan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC21 Jan 2026WPS/4918/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

employment in lieu of land acquisition; Rehabilitation Policy of State Government; Khasra No.1721/23 Janjgir Champa; allotment to Prakash Industries; alleged discrimination in grant of employment; Mechanical Engineering degree; direction to decide representation by speaking order; fresh representation within 15 days; speaking order within 45 days; writ petition finally disposed of; Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; limited prayer fair and reasonable.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of: petitioner permitted to file a fresh representation with relevant documents within 15 days of receipt of the order; respondent authorities directed to decide it by a speaking order within 45 days. ¶34

Aashish Kumar Dewangan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to employment in lieu of the acquisition of his forefather's land under the Rehabilitation Policy of the State Government, the acquired land having been allotted to respondent No.7. +2 more

¶24

Ratio / Principle

The Court found the limited prayer — permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the concerned authorities and having it decided in accordance with law — fair and reasonable.

¶32

Key takeaways

If the petitioner prefers a fresh representation before the authorities concerned, annexing relevant documents, within 15 days from receipt of a copy of the order, the respondent authorities are to decide the same.ratio¶33
The respondent authorities are directed to decide the petitioner's fresh representation by a speaking order within a period of 45 days.ratio¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Single Bench), WPS No. 4918 of 2023, decided 22/01/2026 by Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J. — The petitioner, whose forefather's land (Khasra No.1721/23, area 0.15 acres) was acquired by the State and allotted to respondent No.7 – Prakash Industries, sought employment in lieu of acquisition under the Rehabilitation Policy of the State Government, alleging that the respondent authorities were not considering his case despite his Mechanical Engineering degree and that respondent No.7 had already employed other similarly situated persons. Without deciding entitlement on merits, the Court accepted the limited prayer as fair and reasonable and disposed of the petition, permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation with relevant documents within 15 days and directing the respondent authorities to decide it by a speaking order within 45 days.

2026:CGHC:3956

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 4918 of 2023

¶6

Aashish Kumar Dewangan S/o Shri Uttam Dewangan, Aged 30 Years R/o Santoshi Mandir Ke Pass Champa Tahsil Champa District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Chhattisgarh Shashan Udhyog Vibhag Mantralay Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶10

2 - Director, Udhyog Sanchalnalay Chhattisgarh Udhyog Bhawan 1st Floor Ring Road No. 01 Telibandha Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶11

3 - Managing Director, C.S.I.D.C. Udhyog Bhawan 1st Floor Ring Road No. 01 Telibandha Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶12

4 - Mahaprabandhak, Office Jila Vyapar Avm Udhyog Centre Janjgir Champa District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

¶13

5 - Collector, Janjgir Champa District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

¶14

6 - Anuvibhagiya Adhikari Rajasv, Karyalay Anuvibhagiya Adhikari Rajasv Janjgir District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

¶15

7 - Director, Ms. Prakash Industries Limited Village- Hathnevra Tahsil Champa District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

¶16

... Respondent(s)

¶17

Digitally signed SHYNAAJAY by SHYNA AJAYDN: cn=SHYNAAJAY,o=PERSONAL,st=Chhattisgarh,c=IN

¶18

(Cause Title downloaded from CIS Periphery)

¶19

¶20

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shivam Agarwal, Advocate For Respective : Mr. Pranjal Agarwal, Advocate and Mr. Anumay Tiwari, Respondents Panel Laywer

¶21

SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶22

Order on Board

¶23

22/01/2026

¶24

The petitioner has filed this petition seeks relief regarding the acquisition of his forefather’s land bearing Khasra No.1721/23, area 0.15 acres. The said land was acquired by the State and subsequently allotted to respondent No.7 – Prakash Industries. Pursuant to the Rehabilitation Policy of the State Government, the petitioner is entitled to employment in lieu of the acquisition, however, despite the said policy, no such employment has been provided to him.

¶25

The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs.:

¶26

10.1 That the representation of the petitioner which has been filed as Annexure P/1 may be directed to be decided on merits in accordance with law within some stipulated period.

¶27

10.2 The respondent be directed to give employment in lieu of acquisition of land of the forefathers of the petitioner in preferential manner.

¶28

10.3 Any other relief which this Court deems fit may also be granted.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner possesses requisite qualification, holding a degree in Mechanical Engineering. However, the respondent authorities are not considering his case for grant of employment in lieu of the acquisition of the land of his forefathers. He submits that Respondent No.7, who was allotted the subject land following its acquisition, has already granted employment to other similarly situated

¶30

¶31

persons. However, so far as the present petitioner is concerned, respondent No.7 is discriminating against him by not giving employment. Learned counsel makes a limited prayer to dispose of this petition, permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the concerned authorities for redressal of his grievance in respect of employment in lieu of acquisition of his land and further, it is prayed that the concerned authorities be directed to decide the same in accordance with law.

¶32

The prayer appears to be fair and reasonable.

¶33

Accordingly, the Petition is disposed of with a direction that if the petitioner prefers a fresh representation before the authorities concerned, annexing relevant documents, within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the respondent authorities, are, in turn, directed to decide the same by a speaking order within a period of 45 days.

¶34

With the aforesaid observations/directions, this Petition is finally disposed of.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)

¶37

Judge

¶38

Shyna Ajay

Aashish Kumar Dewangan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aashish Kumar 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Head Office Vs Krishna Kumar Vishwakarma

Anand Kumar Lahre Vs Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Bank Maryadit

Smt. Dulari Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Varsha Sharma Vs the Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat Mahasamund

Anil Yadu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Geeta Samrath Vs State of Chhattisgarh