Chhattisgarh High Court
WPC/4841/2026 of GOPICHAND YADAV Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 22 September 2026
2026:CGHC:41312 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4841 of 2026 1 - Gopichand Yadav S/o Dori Lal Yadav Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Khamhardeeh, Tehsil Bhothiya, District Sakti, C.G. 2 - Upasin Bai W/o Late Chhedi Lal Aged About 70 Years R/o Village Murlideeh, Tehsil
CGHC010355942026
2026:CGHC:41312
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 4841 of 2026
1 - Gopichand Yadav S/o Dori Lal Yadav Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Khamhardeeh, Tehsil Bhothiya, District Sakti, C.G.
2 - Upasin Bai W/o Late Chhedi Lal Aged About 70 Years R/o Village Murlideeh, Tehsil Jaijaipur District Sakti, C. G.
3 - Pratap Singh Chandra S/o Late Peela, Goutiya Aged About 64 Years R/o Village Murlideeh Tehsi Jaijaipur, District Sakti C. G.
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Urban Administration Manahandi Bhawan Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District Raipur C.
G.
2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Departmentn Of Panchayat And Rural Development Manahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, Nawa, Raipur District Raipur C.G.
3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Revenue Mahanadi Bhwan Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District Raipur C. G.
4 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Public Works, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District Raipur C. G.
RUCHI
YADAV
Digitally
signed by
RUCHI YADAV
5 - Collector Sakti District Sakti C. G.
6 - Sub Divisional Office Sakti District Sakti C. G.
7 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Sakti District Sakti C. G.
... Respondent(s)
( Cause title taken from CIS Periphery)
For Petitioner(s)
: Mr. Yogesh Chandra, Advocate
For Respondent/State
: Mr. Abhishek Gupta, P.L.
SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 23/09/2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. By way of the present petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant compensation to the petitioners in lieu of their land acquired by the respondents for construction of road from Nandeli to Kachanda. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to take decision over the representations of the petitioners (Annexure P-3) in the stipulated period of time. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to assess compensation as per the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act-2013. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Direct the Respondents to conduct a proper survey and measurement of the land belonging to each Petitioner that has been utilized for the said road construction. 10.5 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Direct the Respondents to pay interest on the amount of compensation at a just and equitable rate from the year 1980 till the date of actual payment to the Petitioners. 10.6 That, the Hon'ble Court be further pleased to grant such other relief(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice and fair play.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the private agricultural lands of the petitioners were utilized by the respondents for construction of a road without initiating any acquisition proceedings and without payment of compensation. It is submitted that such deprivation of property is in violation of Article 300A of the Constitution of India. He further submits that the petitioners have been deprived of their land since around 1980 and, despite repeated representations, no compensation has been paid to them. The petitioners, therefore, seek payment of just and fair compensation, along with appropriate interest from the date of dispossession till the date of actual payment. Learned counsel further submits that similarly situated villagers of Tahsil Jaijaipur had earlier approached this Court in W.P.(C) No. 1820/2015, which was allowed vide order dated 04.11.2024, and therefore, the petitioners are also entitled to similar relief.
3. Learned State counsel submits that a similar order has already been passed by this Court in respect of similarly situated persons and that he has no objection to the petitioners' claim being considered in terms of the said order.
4. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record, this Court finds that the petitioners have claimed compensation in respect of their agricultural land stated to have been utilized by the respondents for construction of the road from Nandeli to Kachanda, without acquisition and payment of compensation.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon the order dated 04.11.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 1820/2015, wherein, in respect of similarly situated land owners whose lands were utilized for construction of the same road, the claim for compensation was considered by this Court.
7. In view of the aforesaid submission and the fact that learned State counsel has no objection to consideration of the claim of the petitioners in the light of the aforesaid order, the petitioners are directed to submit a fresh representation before the competent authority along with all relevant documents, including the details of the land in question and a copy of the order dated 04.11.2024 passed in W.P.(C) No. 1820/2015.
8. Upon receipt of such representation, the competent authority shall consider and decide the claim of the petitioners for payment of compensation, including their claim with regard to interest, in accordance with law and in the light of the order dated 04.11.2024 passed in W.P.(C) No. 1820/2015. The competent authority shall also verify the relevant revenue records and the extent of land utilized for construction of the road and shall pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the representation.
9. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioners and the competent authority shall take an independent decision in accordance with law.
10. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ruchi