Lakhan Lal Dhairya v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No. 3127 of 2018
1. Lakhan Lal Dhairya, S/o Surit Ram Dhairya, aged about 38 years.
2. Vinay Kumar Dhairya, S/o Surit Ram Dhairya, aged about 35 years.
3. Itwari Ram Dhairya, S/o Mohan Ram, aged about 67 years. All are R/o Village Masaniyakala, Police Station Sakti, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) ---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of Revenue, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
2. Collector, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
3. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Land Acquisition Officer, Competent Authority (National Highway), Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
4. Union of India, Through Secretary, Ministry of Road, Transport & National Highways, New Delhi (India).
5. National Highways Authority of India, Through Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, National Road Area, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioners :
Shri Govind Dewangan, Advocate.
For Respondent Nos.1 to 3 :
Shri Prafull N. Bharat, Additional Advocate General.
For Respondent No.4 :
Shri B. Gopa Kumar, Assistant Solicitor General. Hon'ble Shri Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board Per Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice 14.11.2018 1.
Heard counsel for the Petitioners, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and learned Assistant Solicitor General for the Union of India.
2.
An identical issue raised in the present writ application by the Petitioners challenging the notification issued by the State of Chhattisgarh fixing a multiplier of 1.00 for calculation of compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short 'Act of 2013') has been heard and decided in a batch of writ applications on 30.10.2018. The lead case being the case of Smt. Anita Agrawal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others (WPC No.1649 of 2017). 3.
The notification in question has been quashed in the batch of writ applications mentioned above and in view of the same, the present writ application stands allowed. The notification in question contained in Annexure P/1 dated 04.12.2014 stands quashed.
Sd/- Sd/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi) (Parth Prateem Sahu) Chief Justice Judge Brijmohan