teit H16H COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PET1T10N (C} No. 1 704 of 2009 PETITIONER : 1. Sukh Ram Urao Sto Rethu Urao, aged about: 60 years. 2. Nan Dau S/o Rethu Urao, aged about: 50 years, Both are R/o. viltage: Rlya Para, Tahal : Raigarh, District: Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Secretary Revenue Department, Mantrafaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District: Raipur 2. Collector, Ralgarh, District: Raigarti (C.G.) 3. Land Acquisition OfTicer S Sub DMsional Officer, Raigarh, District: Raigarh (C.G.) 4. Executive Engineer, Pubtfc Wori® Department, Raigarh, District: Raigarh (C.G.) WR1T PETmON UNOER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTIOMOF INDiA SB: Hon'bte Shri Satish K. Aanihotri. J. Present: Shri P.K.Pate!, Advocate for the petitioner. Shn M.P.S. Bhatia, Deputy Govemment Advocatefor the State/respondents. ^RALORDER ~ (Passed on 31ss day of March, 2009) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petltioner submits thgt the land of the petltioner beartng Khasra No. 193/2, 194/1 and 196, situated at village Bade Rampur, Raigarh, tias been acqulred by the respondents without making payment of compensation. 2. Shri Bhatia, leamed Deputy Govemment Advocate appearing tor the State/respondents submits that so far as acqutsiti(m proceedings in respect of land tn dispute Is concerned, the proceedlngs initlated under provisions of Land Acquisitton Act have been dropped as compensation amount has not been depc^ited by the beneflciary. Thus, there is nothing in this matter as there Is no proceedings for acquisltion ofthe land in dispute. 3. In view of the above submission made by leamed counsel appearing for the State/respondents, according to teamed counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives for adjudication. 4. Accordingly, the petition stands dlsposal of. Satish K. Agnihotn Judge