High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/2113/2020disposed off

Sunil Kumar Ratre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-09-30Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No. 2113 of 2020 Sunil Kumar Ratre S/o Shri Bhikharilal Ratre Aged About 28 Years R/o Village- Riko, Tah. Aarang, Presently R/o Telibandha, Satnami Para, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

---Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Raipur Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Collector-Cum-Officiating Dy. Secretary (In Land Acquisition Matter) Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. SDO-Cum-Land Acquisition Aarang (Performed The Duties Of A Collector In The Matter Of Land Acquisition Matter) Tahsil- Aarang, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. Naya Raipur Development Authority (NRDA) Through Its Chief Executive Engineer, Govind Sarang Parisar, 2nd Floor, New Rajendra Nagar, Sector7, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Sushobhit Singh, Advocate.

For Respondent No.4 :

Shri Anumeh Shrivastava, Advocate.

For State :

Shri Manteen Siddique, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 30.09.2020

1. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that the property belonging to the petitioner's family measuring 2.89 Hect. At village Riko, PH No.73, Revenue Circle, Mandir Hasaud, Tahsil Arang, Distt. Raipur was acquired by the respondent No.3 for respondent No.4. The award under the Land Acquisition Act was passed as early as on 31.12.2015 but till date the petitioner or his family members have not received any compensation amount against the said acquisition of their family property.

2. According to the petitioner, he should now also be paid interest on the said amount.

3. Considering the fact that there is already an award passed on 31.12.2015, the writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of directing the

-2respondent No.3 to ensure that compensation amount payable to the petitioner if it has not been released till now is released in accordance with law at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days.

4. As regards the claim of interest on the delayed payment of compensation, the petitioner would have to move an appropriate application before the respondent No.3, who, in turn, shall decide the same in accordance with law as to whether the petitioner would be entitled for interest or not, which would always be subject to challenge by the petitioner, if still aggrieved.

5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder