Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 12]

Chattisgarh High Court

Jainarayan Agarwal vs State Of Chhattisgarh 10 Wps/931/2018 ... on 29 January, 2018

Author: Sanjay K. Agrawal

Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal

                                           1

                                                                              NAFR

              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                          Writ Petition (C) No. 205 of 2018

        Jainarayan Agarwal S/o S/o Late Baldev Agrawal, Aged About 65 Years, R/o
        Village- Dandgaon P. S. And Tahsil- Udaipur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                       ---- Petitioner

                                       Versus

     1. State Of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Revenue
        Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

     2. The Collector Surguja, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja
        (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

     3. The Sub- Divisional Officer/Land Acquisition Officer, Udaipur, District-
        Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

     4. The Tahsildar Udaipur, Tahsil- Udaipur District- Surajpur, Chhattisgarh.

     5. The Sub- Divisional Officer, (P.W.D.) Udaipur, District-             Surguja,
        Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

                                                                    ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. A. N. Pandey, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. R. N. Pusty, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 29/01/18

1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's land has been acquired by respondents No. 2 to 5 for construction of the road, in lieu of which no compensation has been paid to the petitioner, against which he has also made a representation before respondent authorities, but the same has not been considered and decided till date, hence this petition.

2. Be that as it may, the respondent No. 2 - Collector, Surguja is directed to consider and decide the petitioner's representation strictly in accordance 2 with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

3. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

SD/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka