\‘L G) $§NELE i§£$~§$§§ W {gogf BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT pE'rITION (crNo. QWH /2o1o PETITIONERS : 1. ganas Ram Rathiya, S/o Dular Singh, aged about 45 years, : 2. Jagat Ram, S/o Samaru Yadav, aged about 60 years; 3. Budhram Rathiya, S/ o Dubraj Rathiya, aged about 60 years; Bholanath Rathiya, S/o Chatur Singh Rathiya, aged about 24 years; Janakram Yadav, S / o Samru Yadav, aged about 55 years; Prahlad Yadav, S//o hukuram Yadav, ‘ aged about 38 years; Yadram Yaav, S/o Samam Yadav, aged about 37 years; Champa Bai, W/o Vidyadhar Patel, aged abot 32 years; Dataram Yadav, S/ o Chamra adav, aged aout 48 years; Bikauram Yad, S/ o Balthu Ram Yadav, aged about 48 years; Laxmin bai, D/o Daulat Ram Rathiya, aged abot 27 years; Bisahu Ram Rathiya, S/o Bhukha Ram Rathiya, aged about 48 years; Vidyadhar Patel, S/ o Kedr Nath patel, Caste- Aghariya, aged about 4O years; A11 are R/o village— Badadarha (Rampur), P.O. —Kevli, Tehsil-Dabhra, District— ’ Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) VERSUS i RESPONDENTS : 1) Union of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry of Environment 8r, Forest, New Delhi. a T d u Y b av u a éi HIGH COURT OF CHHATI‘ISGARH AT BILAS-PUR WRIT PETITION (C) No. 6421 0f2010 Fanas Ram Rathiya & Others. PETITIONER VERSUS RESPONDENTS : Union of India & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri Ashish Surana, Advocate for the petitioner. Smt. Fouzia Mina, Assistant-Solicitor General for the Union oflndia. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No. 2; 4 to 6. Shri V.V.S.Moorthy, Senior Advocate with Shri Pawan Shrivastava, Advocate for the respondent No. 3. Shri Sanjay K. Agawal, Advocate for the remondent No.7. ORDER ORAL (Passed on 29 day ofJune, 2011) . Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the gievance ofthe petitioners is that the respondent No. 7/Company, without purchase or aequiring the land of the petitioners, has started constructing a thermal power piant over their land. 2. Shri Thakur, learned I’anel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondent No. 2, 4 to 6 submits that action shall be taken against the respondent No. 7/Company, if it is found that there is encroachment upon the land by some one including the respondent No. 7, without following the due process of law to acquire their land either by way of purchase or otherwise. 3. Shri Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 7 submits that the allegations made in this petition are not correct. 4. Be that as it may, without making any observations on the allegation and counter allegation, the Collector, Janjg'r-Champa is directed to look into the grievances of the petitioners, and aiter ah‘ording proper opportunity of hearing to ail the concemed parties, pass appropriate orders in accordance wim law on its own merits and perspective, as early as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks non: receipt ofa copy ofthis order. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is k disposed of. Sdl- Satish K. Agnihotrii Judge