Mathura v. Union Of India

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5068 of 2021 1.

Mathura W/o Late Jaimal Aged About 55 Years, Schedule Tribe 2.

Digambar S/o Chamar Singh Aged About 32 Years Schedule Tribe 3.

Nandkumar S/o Karansay, Aged About 31 Years Caste Schedule Tribe 4.

Nar Singh S/o Mohan Singh Aged About 43 Years Caste Schedule Tribe 5.

Samaru S/o Bhandari Aged About 62 Years Caste Schedule Tribe 6.

Teejram S/o Bhandari Aged About 65 Years Caste Schedule Tribe 7.

Madan S/o Jotram Aged About 50 Years Caste Schedule Tribe All are R/o Village Chhal, Tehsil Dharamjaigarh, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1.

Union Of India Through Ministry Of Coal Rajpath Area Central Secretariat, New Delhi.110001 2.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3.

Collector Raigarh District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 4.

Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Dharamjaigarh, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 5.

South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through Its Chairman Cum C.M.D. Office At Seepat Road Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 6.

South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through Incharge Officer (Land Revenue) S.E.C.L. Raigarh Area, Office At Kelovihar Raigarh, DistrictRaigarh, Chhattisgarh. 7.

Deputy G.M. (M)/sub Area Manager Chhal Sub Area S.R.C.L. Raigarh Area, Chhal, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ----Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr. Hariom Rai, Advocate For Respondent No.1 :

Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan, Advocate on behalf of ASG.

For State :

Mr. Pawan Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer For Respondents No. 5 to 7 :

Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board

10/12/2021 1.

The claim of the petitioners seems to be the benefit that they are entitled for under the Rehabilitation and Resettlement package on account of the land belonging to the petitioners, which stands acquired in the year 2014.

2.

The counsel for the petitioners submits that under the Act of 2013 they would be entitled for the benefits otherwise also is reflected in schedule-II of the Act of 2013.

3.

Considering the nature of dispute that the petitioners have made and also taking note of the fact that the claim of the petitioners seems to have been filed on 03.12.2021 and the present writ petition has been field on 04.12.2021 i.e. on the very next day, the writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of directing the petitioners to approach the concerned District Collector in accordance with the provisions of the Act of 2013 ventilating their grievances.

4.

If the petitioners approach the respondent No.2-the District Collector, the respondent No.2 in turn may scrutinize the claim of the petitioners on its own merits in accordance with law at the earliest. 5.

With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved