Ganga Prasad Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No. 1439 of 2021 • Ganga Prasad Yadav, S/o Mukunda Yadav, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Ward No. 12, Baloda, Police Station Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department of Revenue and Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2.

Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3.

Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Champa Division, Champa, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.

4.

Collector (Land Acquisition), District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. 5.

Sub Divisional Officer(Revenue)/Land Acquisition Officer, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr. Govind Dewangan, Advocate.

For Respondent/State :

Mr. Somkant Verma, P. L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 10.03.2021 1.

The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is the inaction on the part of the respondents in not paying the petitioner compensation against the land belonging to the petitioner which has been acquired for the purpose of construction of the Baloda Bypass Road. 2.

According to the petitioner, the said property has been taken over/acquired by the respondents under the Mutual Consent Land Purchasing Scheme, 2016. The further contention of the petitioner is that the respondents themselves had vide order dated 30.10.2019 amended the aforesaid scheme of 2016 and

have ordered that the compensation has to be calculated applying the multiplier of 2 in the event the land situates in the rural area and multiplier of 4 in case if the land situates in the urban area. According to the petitioner, the respondents have neither paid any compensation to the petitioner, nor have they properly assessed or quantified the actual compensation that the petitioner is entitled for. 3.

Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition itself can be disposed of directing the respondents No.4 & 5 to immediately consider the claim of the petitioner, so far as grant of compensation to the petitioner against the land belonging to him, which has been acquired for construction of the Baloda Bypass Road. 4.

The respondents are also expected to consider the claim of the petitioner in terms of the scheme applicable. It is expected that the authorities concerned would decide the same, subject to the verification of the entire facts.

5.

It shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to apprise the respondents No.4 & 5, so far as the order passed by this Court is concerned.

6.

With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Deepti jha/Gouri