nfS' /' 2.) a-o BEPORETHE HON'BLE HIGH COURT QF CHHATriSGAftM AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No.^^'l^ / 1&U ^ PETITIQNERS r^ •^ ^ffy/ ^w / ^v/^/ .A^y ^/Q^ '/.^y ^ ^' A^'. .-•"' <y ^ 1. Raju Dheevar, S/o Gayadeen, Agecl about 42 Years, 2. Johan Khute, S/o Sudrshan, Agecf about 69 Ye'ars, 3. Ram Khilawan Yadav, S/o Dashrath Yadav, Aged about 70 Years, 4. Anand Ram, S/o Arnar Singh, Aged about 68 Years, 5. Chandrika Dhiwar, W/o Sudhu Dhiwar, Aged about 32 Years; 6. Ramai Satnarni, S/o Alen Satnami, Agecl about 70 Years, .7. Ganga Rawat, S/o Keju Rawat, Aged about 70 Years, 8. Arjun, S/o Samay Lal Aged about 50 Years, 9. Sanl: Ram, S/o Daya Ram, Aged about 42 Years, 10. Blsauha Yadav, S/o Dhansay Yadav, Aged about 50 Years, 11, Vishal Satneimi, S/o Samaru Satnami, Aged about 60 Years, 12. Shriram Dheewar, S/o Late Hari Lal, Aged about: 34 Years, ^'13. Ganeshiya Satnami, W/0 Ram Lal Satnaml, Aged about 80 Years, 14. Magal Chand Todar, S/o Late Mehattar, Aged about 75 Years, <^ / 15. SankarSahu, S/o Firanta Sahu, Aged about 47 Years, 16. Dasru, S/o.Maha Singh, Aged about 75 Years, '-17. Bhagwat Sonwani, S/o Bhukhn Satnami, Aged about 55 Years, -18. Sagun Chand Satnarnl, S/o .lati Ram Satnanil, Aged about 67 Years, 19. Atma Ram Sahu, S/o Ghasiya Sahu, Aged about 80 Years, . 20. Ramadhar Sahu, S/o Gowardhan Sahu, Aged about 70 Years 21. Blsauha Ram, S/o Keju, Aged about 65 Years, All Petitioners R/o, '^'illage - Dumartrai, Tehsil &. Dlstrict- Raipur, (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^<_ /Sf i 9 1. ^ ^fBM-S- ; ,'•'" ! '^ j :'/flr' ••? <s: / •ti." ^B- 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secr'etary, Department of Revenue ;ii"id Land AcquisiLion Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhaw<in , Raipur (C.G.) 2. Collector, District F^aipur, C.G. y- .0 -i-. ^3. Sub Divisional Officer and 1-and Acquisition Officer, Rafpiif, Tehsil Rgipur & District Ralpur, C.G. ^" 4. Saurabh Daga, S/o S.K. Daga, Aged abciut 33 years, R/D Near Akashwani, Kali Mcindir, Civil Llne Raipur, C.G. .J WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 O R_Thi@ CONSTITUTION QF INDIA /y^\ -•".)"• ,s~'i3 3t : A -— t-1iuri l-.UUKi Ut~ iJi-li-Ai WH : BILASPUR PET1 ^fSSiT P^TIT^F^M /F^ MFS zlQzlQ F^^ ^ni yVj-^i s r"s^ s, i ; 'v^i^i \'i^ff i'a^/. ^y'-f's \j>r ^.~\j i Tiif^'-.i'C C5C* S3/t,;g-i r*"iil^^,.-M.,<-iu :? i?'^-?.^. n ;-i US-/i^C,r^O i~l^;U L-.'^'St^Vcil &'!w'f':S- versus =ESPONDENTS rk^^^+<-ic-.n-. otaie oi tjnnattisgsrn & Utners CWrit Petreion under Articie 226 of the Constitution of indi Single Bench : Hon'bis Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Pr&sent:- Shri Safr/endra Sahu, Advocate for ihe petitioners. Shn Arun Sao, Govemment Advocate for the State. 3. .r^~^r- UKULK (Passed on this 271" day of August, 2011) Learned counsei appearing for the petitioners submits that the pavment OT i'ererence is oenaino sn resDeci ot comDensation in the iand in disDute invoived. Underthe orovisions of Section 31 ofthe Land Acquisition Act, 1984, the State Govemmeni is required to deposit the entire rnoney, if the matter is pendinj befor-s referencs Court for enhancement of the comDensaflon. Lssrned counse! further submits ihat the petitionere are simiiariy aggrieved by the dispuie, whic'n is pending consideration before the reference Court. Thus, the petitioners may be pei-mitted to seek irno!eadment befors ihe rsference Court. Learned counsei appearing for other side has no objection. It is ofd6r©dss ^rsvsd for. » Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as vnthdrawn vifit'n the above-stated liberty. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 6