IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF HHATTISGARH JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR W.P.(c) No. MCJH /2o1¢1z / Bhushan Das Panka S/ O Udla Das Panka Aged about 40 years Occupation Kotwar R/O Village Kaiya Bandha Post Rakhi , TahsilAarang Dist— Raipur (C.G.) PETITIONER w/ VERSUS (1) / State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary , Department of Revenue Mantralaya,D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur ( C.G.) ‘ eta mkm g, RESPONDENTS: K t/ (2) Coltctor, Raipur Dist—Raipur (C. G.) / (3) Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Raipur Dist Raipur(C. G.) \z) (4)Chief Executive Officer New Raipur Development Telibandha Jedhi Vila Near Natioanl Garage Ring Road Raipur Dist Raipur { C.G.) / (5) Nazul Officer Capital Area Development Authority Raipur ( Chhattisgarh) Authority WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION 0g INDIA CA, am m W 00 a mawRw% WW WW *mm‘m rivastava‘ J. the petitioner. vyer for the State. SB : Hon’ble Shri Manindra Mohan Sf 26-04-201 1 Ms. Deepali Pandey, counsel for Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lav ..... \ Heard. The petitioner is‘ a village—Kotwa the following re!iefs:— “10. RELIEF SOUGHT Jhe petitioner most humbi‘ No. 10.1 That the Hon’ble to consider/decide the respondent representation/appli ation dated 21-10-2010 of the petitioner for grant the facilities and allot land as the other displaced per ons in compliance of the directions of the ldeal Rehabi itation policy of ChhattisgarhState 2007 and thereaft r acquire the land granted to the petitioner as servic land. 10.2 That, the petitioner therefore prays for direction to the respondents to gra tthe facilities and allot land as the other rsons in compliance of the directions/provision of the Ideal Rehabilitation policy displaced of Chhattisgarh Sta 2007. which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the present fa ts and circumstances of the case may kindly be grant d." 10.3 That, any other rel The petitioner thus, in substan e, is praying for issuance of a direction to decide his representation d ted 21-10~201O (Annexure P-4) for grant of facilities and allotment of land as the other displaced persons as per the ldeal Rehabilitation policy of Ch attisgarh State 2007 (Annexure P- 5). Ms. Deepali Pandey, learned c unsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, argues that as per the provisi ns of clause 4.1.6. of the policy, a r. He has filed this writ petition for r prays for the following reliefs:- Court be pleased to direct the [tfrrl' aha”? e f i ‘ S ””JXI-Hc-22 a? W w-R «gwxwtlx w\ Wm 200 mam mm mma mmmw WMIEWW émWm *‘L/ decision has been taken that no compensation of service land would be given to the Kotwars, however, at the time of allotment of the plots and granting other benefits, their cases shal also be considered as the cases of other displaced persons, but nothing has been done in the interest of the petitioner though many efforts have been made. Shri Shashank Thakur, learned F'anel Lawyer appearing on behalf of the State/respondents, submits that if a fresh application is tiled by the petitioner as per the policy 2007, the competent Authority shall take a decision the said application. He suamits that almost in a similar matter on i.e. 7524/2009, this Court has disposed of the writ petition of the Kotwars Association by giving the members an opportunity to file individual applications. Accordingly, this writ petition is d'sposed off with a direction that if so advised, the petitioner may file a fres application before the Authority in accordance with law for grant of P tta/allotment of land and if such application is flied, it shall be dispos of by the concerned authority in accordance with the revenue laws and also keeping in mind the provisions of the State Rehabilitation Policy, 2007. ‘u With the above observation/dire tions, this writ petition is disposed off. No order as to costs *7 Sdl- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Tumane Judge Meat???