← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/2959/2016disposed off

Nasim Bano v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-12-01Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2959 of 2016

1. Nasim Bano W/o Mohammad Yunus, Aged About 46 Years Caste Musalman, R/o Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through: Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

2. The Collector, Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, (Chhattisgarh)

3. Land Acquisition Officer Cum Sub Divisional Officer ( Revenue), Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, (Chhattisgarh)

4. The State Of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

5. Executive Engineer, Water Resources, Gariyaband Division, Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondent And WPC No. 2961 Of 2016

1. Keshav S/o Ghansuram Sahu, Aged About 48 Years

2. Dharmendra, S/o Ghansuram Sahu, Aged About 42 Years

3. Smt. Chameli Bai, W/o Keshav Sahu, Aged About 45 Years All are R/o Ward No.7, Nagar Plalika Parishad, Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, (Chhattisgarh)

---- Petitioner Vs

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through: Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. The Collector, Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, (Chhattisgarh)

3. Land Acquisition Officer Cum Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, (Chhattisgarh)

4. The State Of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

5. Executive Engineer, Water Resources, Gariyaband Division, Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondent For Petitioners Shri P.P. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent/State Shri Shashank Thakur, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 01/12/2016 1.

Land acquisition award was passed in favour of the petitioners under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resttlement Act, 2013.

2.

By quoting the provisions of the old Act i.e. the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 the petitioners moved reference before

the Collector, which was wrongly sent to the District Judge.

3.

Finding that the Court of original jurisdiction has no jurisdiction over the matter in view of the provisions of Section 63 of the Act, 2013, the District Judge has returned the reference to the Collector and thereafter, the Collector has not made any fresh reference to the authority constituted under the provisions of Section 51 of the Act, 2013.

4.

Considering the limited prayer made in these petitions, both the writ petitions are disposed of with a direction that the concerned Collector shall send the reference under Sections 64 & 65 of the Act, 2013 for adjudication by the competent authority appointed under Section 51 thereof. 5.

Let the Collector make necessary order within a period of six weeks from today.

Sd/- Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra Gowri