High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCC/212/2020dismissed

Shri Anil Kumar Singh v. Project Director Of N. H. Department (National Highway Authority Of India)

2020-03-02Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 212 of 2020 Shri Anil Kumar Singh S/o Late Kuber Singh Aged About 53 Years R/o 27/125, New Shanti Nagar, Near Temple Of Lord Hanuman, Shankarnagar, Police Station Civil Line, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Currently Residing At Gudyari, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

1. Project Director Of N. H. Department (National Highway Authority Of India) Project Karyanvayan Ekaei, V.I.P. Estate A-7 Mahanadi Bhawan, Shankarnagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Sachham Pradhikari (Competent Officer) And The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Applicant :

Mr. Praveen Shrivastava, Advocate For Res. No.1 :

Mr. B. Gopa Kumar, Advocate For Res. No.2 :

Ms. Sunita Jain, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 02/03/2020

1. The present MCC has been filed seeking modification of the order dated 11.12.2019 passed in WPC 3286/2019.

2. The modification sought for by the petitioner is to the contents of Paragraph 3 of the order wherein it has been mentioned that the petitioner has not received any compensation.

3. According to the petitioner "any compensation" has been termed as " Actual Compensation".

4. Perusal of the contents of the writ petition as also the contents of the present MCC, it clearly reflects that there is no averment in the writ petition of the petitioner having received any compensation. All that this Court meant while disposing of the writ petition was that

petitioner should be paid compensation as quantified by the authorities which definitely means the "Actual compensation" payable to him according to the terms of the acquisition proceedings and rules and guidelines governing the field at that relevant point of time.

5. Given the said facts, this Court is of the opinion that no modification as such is required whatever quantification, done by the respondent authorities in accordance with law, shall have to be paid to the petitioner.

6. With the aforesaid observations, the present MCC stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit