Deepak Kumar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2419 of 2020 Deepak Kumar S/o Shiv Kumar Dubey Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Khorsi, Tahsil Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Collector /land Acquistion Officer, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

3. Executive Engineer Water Resources Surveyor And Construction Of Baraz Department, Division No. 02, Champa District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

4. Sub Divisional Officer Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. N. K. Chatterjee, Advocate For Respondent/s :

Mr. Sudeep Verma, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 19/10/2020

1. The grievance of the petitioner is the inaction of the part of the respondents in not paying any compensation to the petitioner against the land belonging to the petitioner which was acquired by the respondents for the purpose of constructing a Barrage known as Shivrinarayan Barrage Scheme.

2. Contention of the petitioner is that he had a property situated at Khasra No. 1375/2 measuring 0.3 Acres. The said property has been acquired for the construction of aforementioned Barrage. Contention

of the petitioner is that the acquisition proceedings also is concluded and construction of Barrage has completed, yet petitioner has not been paid any compensation whatsoever.

3. At this juncture State counsel referring to documents with the writ petition submits that from the pleadings it appears that since the award could not be passed within the stipulated period, the proceedings of the acquisition initiated at the first instance has lapsed and subsequent acquisition proceedings has to be finalized enabling the petitioner to receive any compensation in case if it has not been paid to him till now.

4. Given the pleadings that the petitioner has made with the writ petition this Court is of the opinion that writ petition can be disposed of directing the petitioner to approach respondent No.2 to 4 by fresh representation/claim in respect of the compensation against the land of his which has been acquired by the respondents. Respondent No.2 to 4 in turn are directed to duly scrutinize the same and after due verification of the factual aspects appropriate proceedings be drawn ensuring payment of compensation if the petitioner is entitled for the same at the earliest preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of fresh representation to be made by the petitioner.

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