Advocates:
['AMIT SHARMA', 'RAJEEV BHARAT', '', 'UPENDRA BHARAT', 'A G']

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

Writ Petition (C) No.3482 of 2017

1. Smt. Presheela D/o Late Dr.Rameshwar Satpati, W/o. Nepal

Mishra, Age-55 years, R/o Navapara, Tahsil Pussore, Raigarh, At

Presently Parsada, P.S. Rengali, Distt.-Jharsugda (Orisha)

2. Smt.Bilashini, D/o Late Dr.Rameshwar Satpati, W/o Sharvan

Kumar Hota, Age-43 years, R/o-Navapara, Tahsil-Pussore,

Raigarh At Presently-R/o. Pussore, Tahsil-Pussore, Raigarh (CG)

3. Smt.Anita D/o late Dr.Rameshwar Satpati, W/o Ghanshyam

Mishra, Age-40 years, R/o-Navapara, Tahsil-Pussore, Raigarh At

Presently-R/o-Bade Mathpara, Sarangarh, Distt.-Raigarh (CG)

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. Sub Divisional Officer Cum Land Acquisition Officer, Raigarh,

Distt.-Raigarh (CG)

2. The Collector, Raigarh, Distt.-Raigarh (CG)

3. Sahebram Satpati, S/o late Dr.Rameshwwar Satpati, Age-60

years, R/o-Navapara, Tahsil-Pussore, Raigarh (CG)

4. Sushil Satpati, S/o late Dr.Rameshwar Satpati, Age-45 years, R/o

Navapara, Tahsil-Possore, Raigarh at Preently-R/o Near Stop Dam

Beladula, Tah. & Distt.-Raigarh (CG)

5. Smt.Bandini, W/o late Dr.Rameshwar Satpati, Age-70 years, R/o-

Navapara, Tahsil-Pussore, Raigarh (CG)

---- Respondents

For Petitioners

:

Mr.Amit Sharma, Advocate

For Respondents No.1&2

:

Mr.R.N.Pusty, Government Advocate

For Respondents No.3 &4

:

Mr.Upendra Bharat, Advocate

Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

Order on Board

02/04/2018

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the

Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Officer has rejected

the application filed by the petitioners on the ground that civil suit is

pending for consideration, whereas the entire compensation has

been taken by respondents No.3 to 5.

2. Learned counsel for respondents No.3 and 4 would submit that the

2

petitioners have already filed civil suit.

3. Be that as it may, since civil suit filed by the petitioners is already

pending for consideration before the jurisdictional Civil Court, it

would be inappropriate to make any observation at this stage.

However, the petitioners are at liberty to claim compensation from

respondents No.3 to 5 depending upon the result of the civil suit.

4. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition finally stands

disposed off. No cost(s).

Sd/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal)

Judge

B/-