High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/257/2020disposed off

Bhunila v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-01-21Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 257 of 2020

1. Bhunila W/o Anil Singh, Aged About 40 Years Caste Kanwar, R/o Village Namnakala, Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

2. Shushila Paikra W/o Ramrat Paikra, Aged About 40 Years Caste Kanwar, R/o Village Namnakala, Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Collector, Surguja, District Surguja Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

3. The Sub Divisional Officer, (Revenue), Cum Prescribed Authority, Land Acquisition, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

4. The Chief Engineer/ Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, National Highway Area, Pensionbada, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

5. The Upper Commissioner, Surguja Division, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Pawan Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For State :

Mr. Ishan Verma, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 21/01/2020

1. The relief sought for by the petitioners through the present writ petition is for issuance of an appropriate direction to respondents no. 2 to 4 to take appropriate steps for ensuring compliance of the order passed by respondent no.5 i.e. the Additional Commissioner, Surguja Division,

Ambikapur, vide his order dated 27.9.2019 passed in case no. 330/A82/2018-19.

2. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that after the respondent no.3 had acquired the property of the petitioners, they were paid compensation at a belated stage and therefore the respondent no.5 vide his order dated 27.9.2019 (Annexure P-1) had ordered for grant of interest on the said belated release of compensation to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though more than three months have passed, the respondents have till date not honoured the said order and therefore an appropriate direction be issued in this regard.

3. Learned State Counsel at this juncture submits that, let the petitioners approach the respondents no. 2 to 4 by way of a fresh representation which shall be considered and decided at the earliest.

4. Given the said facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the present writ petition can be disposed of directing the petitioners to file a fresh claim before respondents no. 2 to 4 within a period of fifteen days from today and the respondents no. 2 to 4 in turn shall ensure compliance of the order dated 27.9.2019 unless the said order is under challenge before any other forum.

5. Let the respondents no. 2 to 4 take a decision on the claim of the petitioners within a further period of 90 days from the date of receipt of representation of the petitioners.

6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit