Case Law Details
Badrivishal Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary (Chhattisgarh High Court)
The Chhattisgarh High Court adjudicated a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of an order dated 16.03.2026 and compensation for alleged misuse of private agricultural land by railway authorities. The petitioner claimed ownership of land measuring 1.40 hectares and contended that the respondents had used the land for storing railway materials such as cemented sleepers and ballast for several years, thereby preventing its use and affecting soil fertility.
The petitioner submitted that despite representations and earlier directions of the Court, no compensation had been granted. It was further contended that due to prolonged use of the land, its nature and fertility were adversely affected, requiring restoration work using machinery, for which bills amounting to ₹1,14,950 and ₹95,040 were placed on record. The petitioner sought reimbursement of these expenses and liberty to pursue further compensation for loss of crops.
The respondents disputed the duration of alleged misuse and questioned the validity of the petitioner’s claims, including the absence of GST details in the submitted bills. However, the Court noted that the respondents had admitted in their own order that the petitioner’s land had been used and was vacated on 07.11.2025. This admission was supported by a report of the Revenue Inspector and a resolution of the Gram Panchayat.
The Court observed that prolonged storage of railway materials on agricultural land adversely affects soil fertility and productivity. While the exact duration of use was treated as a disputed question of fact requiring evidence, the Court found that the expenditure incurred for restoration of the land was substantiated and could be compensated in the writ proceedings.
Accordingly, the Court directed the respondents to pay the amounts of ₹1,14,950 and ₹95,040 to the petitioner within 45 days. It also granted liberty to the petitioner to initiate appropriate civil proceedings for any additional compensation for losses suffered during the period of alleged misuse. The petition was disposed of with these directions.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :-
“10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to call the entire records pertaining to this case.
10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the nature of certiorari/ prohibition/ mandamus, thereby to quash the impugned order dated 16-03-2026 passed by Res no 2 DRM SECR Bilaspur, after declaring it unconstitutional, illegal and arbitrary.
10.3 That, Hon’ble Court may kindly further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to compensate petitioner after fair assessment for actual loss caused by railway/its agency to petitioner’s land bearing khasra no 12/1 area 1.400 hectare with applicable interest on it, and further to pass any order which deems fit including cost of the petition in the interest of Justice.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner is recorded owner of land bearing khasra No.12/1 area 1.40 hectare situated at village Bhupdevpur, Patwari Circle 39, Tahsil Kharsiya, District Raigarh. He would further submit that respondents No.2 and 3 had misused the said land of the petitioner for about 8-10 years by keeping their cemented sleepers and various other construction materials of Railway line works, therefore, the petitioner could not use said land for aforesaid period. This fact has also been reported by the Revenue Inspector vide Ex.P-4 in response to a query raised by the Collector, Raigarh. He would further submit that on account of said encroachment and misuse of private land of the petitioner, he made representation to the Railway authorities, but the same was not decided, therefore, he filed a petition bearing WPC No.5763 of 2025, which was disposed of by this Court with a direction to the Railway Authorities to decide his representation. Subsequently, contempt petition was also filed by the petitioner. Pursuant thereto, respondent No.2 decided representation of the petitioner vide Annexure P-1 dated 16.03.2026, wherein it has been clearly admitted that they have used the private land of the petitioner and the same has been vacated on 07.11.2025, after removing Railway’s materials, sleepers, ballast etc. However, no compensation has been paid to the petitioner. He would further submit that due to prolonged misuse of the land of the petitioner, the fertility of the soil has been adversely affected and its nature has been changed. In order to restore the nature and fertility of the land, the petitioner deployed JCB machine, incurring expenses amounting to Rs.1,14,950/- and Rs.95,040/-, for which bills have been filed. Learned counsel would lastly submit that the respondent authorities may be directed to pay aforesaid bill amount, while granting liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate recovery suit for the actual damage caused to the petitioner on account of loss of crops on said land for the said period.
3. In reply, learned counsel for the Respondents-Railway authorities would submit that the contention of the petitioner that the said land was used for 8-10 years by the Railways is incorrect. It is further submitted that the Panchnama (Annexure P-4) prepared by Revenue Inspector was also not prepared in the presence of the Railway authorities. It is also contended that the bills filed by the petitioner, i.e. Annexure P-7 dated 17.02.2026 and subsequent bill dated 27.02.2026 do not contain GST details or number, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to get said bill amount as compensation. However, learned counsel for the respondents No.2 & 3 seeks time to file reply.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
5. It is contention of the petitioner that his private land bearing khasra No. 12/1 area 1.40 hectare was encroached by the Railway Authorities and misused the same by keeping cemented sleepers and other heavy machinery/Railway material for about 8-10 years, therefore, his land became infertile and its productivity was adversely affected. Though learned counsel for the respondents No.2 & 3/Railway seeks time to file reply, but Annexure P-1, order of rejecting representation of the petitioner seeking compensation, shows that said land of the petitioner was encroached by the Railway Authority by keeping their Railway material, sleepers, ballast etc. However, it has mentioned in Annexure P1 that now the land was vacated on 07.11.2025, meaning thereby that the Railway Authority have admitted that said land was used by them. Revenue Inspector has also submitted a report to the Collector (Annexure P-4) stating that said land of petitioner was misused by Railway Authority for aforesaid purpose for 8-10 years, this fact also finds support from resolution Annexure P-8 dated 30.03.206 passed by the Gram Panchayat, Bhupdevpur. Thus, from the aforesaid facts and documents, particularly the admission of respondent No.2 & 3 in Annexure P-1, it is evident that said land of the petitioner has been used by the Railway Authorities. It cannot be disputed that the prolonged storage of cemented sleepers, railway materials, and ballast on agricultural land adversely affects its fertility and have changed productivity of the soil. In order to restore the land to a cultivable condition, the petitioner incurred expenses by engaging JCB machinery, for which he has placed bills on record, i.e. Annexure P-7 dated 17.02.2026 amounting to Rs. 1,14,950/- and another bill dated 27.02.2026 amounting to Rs. 95,040/-. Though the period of alleged misuse of the said land for 8-10 years is a disputed fact, which can be ascertained after evidence, but the expenditure incurred to the petitioner towards restoration of the land can be compensated in instant-petition, therefore, instead of keeping the present petition pending and granting time to file reply to the respondents, the same is disposed of to the extent of aforesaid bill amount, directing respondents No.2 and 3 to pay aforesaid bill amount of Rs. 1,14,950/- dated 17.02.2026 and bill amount of Rs.95,040/- dated 27.02.2026 to the petitioner, within 45 days’ from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, liberty is left with the petitioner to take recourse to law by filing civil suit, for any further compensation against the loss suffered by him, for the said period, if so advised,
6. With the aforesaid observation/direction the petition stands disposed of.
Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
Author Bio
