(kr-sz ^IteBen^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION fC 1 N0. S Ll^ OF 2011 PETITIONER ^" ^ ^' '..••4^x x^\.% .^•">^\^-v" ^yy ' ^0^-" - •^' ...y Phool Chand Ganda, S/0 Late Shri Tilakrain, by Caste - Ganda, aged about 5-^ years, R/0 Village- -Lakha, Occupation - Kotwar of Gram Panchayat - Lakha, Tahsil and District- Raigarh, (C.G.) Versus RESPONDENTS (1) State of Chhattisgarh, throygh Secretary Revenue, D.K. S. Bhawan, Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) /^-- ^/ }| o 3 &0, ^s^ '^^-'1 (2) Collector, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, (C.G.) (3) Executive Engineer, Kelo Project Sarvekshan Division, Raigarh District- Raigarh, (C.G.) ^ (4) Sub Divisional Officer/ Land Acquisition Officer, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, (C.G.) WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSITITUTION OF INDIA ./^^. //^ ^%sf^} HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (0 No. 3439 of2011 PETITIONERS RESPONDENTS Phool Chand Ganda VERSUS State ofChhattisgarh & Others WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION QF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Aenihotri, J. Present: Shri Awadh Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri V.V.S.Moorthy, Deputy Advocate General with Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Deputy Govemment Advocate for the State/ Respondents. ORDER fORAL) (Passed on Olst day ofJuly, 2011) At the very outset, Shri Tripathi, learned counsel appearmg for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wants to confine his prayer clause 10.2 and submits that identical issue came up for consideration before this Court in W.P.(C) No. 5239/2009 (Baharu Lal v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others\ In the said petition, this Court, vide order dated 04.01.2011 (Annexure P/5) directed the respondents to consider allotment of altemate land to the land owners holding the land as service land and wasgranted Bhoomi Swami right. Shri Tripathi next submits that the petitioner became Bhoomi Swami ofthe land in dispute and compensation has been denied in the impugned award on the ground that instructions were being sought from the higher officers for grant of compensation, if any, or alternate land for resettlement and rehabilitation to those land lords who have obtained ser^ice ^;^^ ^ is::^% 1 y ff'- ;,,,,,^-'',.-f land and thereafter obtained Bhoomi Swami rights. This issue eame up before this Court in the aforesaid writ petition wherein this Court, afiter having considered all the aspects, directed the respondents to consider allotment of alternate land to the petitioners therein. Thus, this petition may be disposed ofin the same terms. Shri Moorthy, leamed Deputy Advocate General appearing with Shri Ajay Dwivedi, leamed Deputy Govemment Advocate for the State/respondents does not controvert the above submission. In view ofthe foregoing, this petition is disposed ofin terms of the order passed in W.P.(C) No. 5239/2009. The respondents are accordingly, directed to consider the claim ofthe petitioner for allotment of altemate land in place of compensation as the land in dispute has become a part ofthe award which vested in the State Govemment. It is further directed to do the needful within a period ofsix months from the date ofreceipt ofa copy of this order.In the event grievance of the petitioner still sur^ives, it is open to the petitioner to revive the claim for further relief. 5. No order asto costs. Sd/- SatishK. Agnihotri Judge