Maanbai v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3614 of 2021

1. Maanbai W/o Nadkumar Banjare, Aged About 56 Years R/o Ward No. 11, Riko, Post Paloud (Mandir Hasod), Tahsil Aarang, District Riapur Chhattisgarh

2. Punni Bai Banjare W/o Santosh Kumar Banjare, Aged About 52 Years R/o 22/2, Ward 9, Lingadih, Satnami Para, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh,

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

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

4. Nava Raipur Development Authority (NRDA) Through Its Chief Executive Engineer, Govind Sarang Parisar, 2nd Floor, New Rajendra Nagar, Sector-7, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Shri Priyash Singh Tuteja, Advocate.

For State :

Shri Ashish Tiwari, G.A.

For respondent No.4: Shri Umesh Verma, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 08/09/2021 1.

The grievance of the petitioners in the present writ petition is that the property belonging to the petitioners family measuring 0.28 Hect. At village Riko, PH No.21, 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 petitioners or their family members have not received any compensation amount against the said acquisition of their family property.

2.

According to the petitioners, they 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 respondent No.3 to ensure that compensation amount payable to the petitioners 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 petitioners 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 petitioners would be entitled for interest or not, which would always be subject to challenge by the petitioners, if still aggrieved. 5.

The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge gouri