Khelawan Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No. 4268 of 2019

1. Khelawan Yadav S/o Bisah Yadav, aged About 55 Years, resident of Village -Gram Panchayat, Muru, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

2. Smt. Savitri Bai W/o Shri Badri Prasad Tiwari, aged about 44 Years, at Present resident Of Village- Suchitra Vihar, Mangla, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

3. Ganga Bai Wd/o Laxman Nishad, aged about 92 Years, at Present resident of Village Suchitra Vihar, Mangla, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

4. Pushpa Bai W/o Krishna Kumar Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No. 13, Ganga Nagar, Sector - 2, Mangla, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. The Collector-Cum-Land Acquisition Officer, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

3. The Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Kota, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

4. The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents

For Petitioner :

Mr. Santosh Bharat, Advocate For State :

Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 26.11.2019

1. In the instant case, the grievance of the petitioners is that the multiplier, for grant of compensation against the land belonging to the petitioners situated at village Muru, District Bilaspur which has been acquired by the respondents for the purpose of construction of a canal under Arpa-Bhaisajhar project has not been properly applied.

2. According to the petitioners, in terms of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, the multiplier of 2 should have been applied so far as the petitioners are concerned but the petitioners have been paid compensation applying the multiplier of 1.

3. State counsel, at this juncture, submits that the judgment of the Division Bench is already subjected to review.

4. On perusal of the record this Court finds that the writ petitions of similar nature i.e. WPC No. 3711/2019 and WPC No. 1649/2017 have all been disposed of wherein similar claims were made. The present writ petition also therefore stands disposed of in similar terms.

5. The petitioners are directed to make a fresh representation within a period of 4 weeks from today along with copy of the order dated 30.10.2018 passed in WPC No. 1649/2017 and other relevant documents. The concerned respondents shall thereafter consider

and decide the representation of the petitioners in accordance with law, within a further period of 10 weeks from the date the petitioners file their representation.

6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai