Badrivishal Gupta vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Facts

The petitioner, Badrivishal Gupta, is the owner of land bearing khasra No. 12/1 in Bhupdevpur village. He alleged that respondents No. 2 and 3 (Divisional Railway Manager and Station Master, South Eastern Central Railway) misused his land for 8-10 years by storing railway materials, including cemented sleepers. This misuse allegedly rendered the land infertile and changed its nature. The petitioner's representation to the railway authorities for compensation was initially not decided, leading to a previous writ petition (WPC No. 5763 of 2025) which directed the railways to decide his representation. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a contempt petition. Respondent No. 2, in an order dated 16.03.2026, admitted the use of the petitioner's land and its vacation on 07.11.2025, but no compensation was paid. The petitioner incurred expenses of Rs. 1,14,950/- and Rs. 95,040/- for restoring the land's fertility and nature.

Held

The Court held that the respondents No. 2 and 3 (Railway authorities) had indeed used the petitioner's private land for storing railway materials, as admitted in Annexure P-1, and had vacated it on 07.11.2025. This fact was further supported by the Revenue Inspector's report (Annexure P-4) and the Gram Panchayat resolution (Annexure P-8). The Court acknowledged that prolonged storage of materials like cemented sleepers on agricultural land adversely affects its fertility and productivity. While the exact period of misuse (8-10 years) was a disputed fact requiring evidence, the Court found that the expenses incurred by the petitioner for restoring the land's condition, evidenced by bills Annexure P-7 (Rs. 1,14,950/-) and the subsequent bill (Rs. 95,040/-), could be compensated in the present writ petition. The Court directed respondents No. 2 and 3 to pay these bill amounts to the petitioner within 45 days. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to pursue a civil suit for any further compensation for loss of crops or other damages suffered during the period of misuse. The issue of GST details on the bills was not explicitly decided as a bar to compensation for restoration costs.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondents No. 2 and 3 (Railway authorities) are liable to compensate the petitioner for the expenses incurred in restoring the fertility and nature of his land, which was allegedly misused for storing railway materials for a prolonged period? (Question of mixed law and fact, turning on principles of tortious liability and compensation for damage to private property). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the Railway authorities admitted to using his land and vacating it on 07.11.2025, as evidenced by Annexure P-1. He further relied on a report by the Revenue Inspector (Ex.P-4) and a Gram Panchayat resolution (Annexure P-8) supporting his claim of misuse for 8-10 years. He argued that the expenses incurred for restoration (Rs. 1,14,950/- and Rs. 95,040/-) should be compensated in the present writ petition. Respondents' Arguments: The respondents-Railway authorities disputed the claim of 8-10 years of land use, stating the Panchnama (Annexure P-4) was not prepared in their presence. They also contended that the bills submitted by the petitioner (Annexure P-7 and subsequent bill) lacked GST details or numbers, making the petitioner ineligible for compensation for these amounts.