1 2025:CGHC:11936 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1328 of 2025 1 - Sanjay Agrawal S/o Om Prakash Agrawal Aged About 37 Years R/o Dr. Joshi Gali, Kotra Road, Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 3 - Gas Authority Of India Limited Through Its Chief And Managing Director, Gas Authority Of India Limited, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 4 - Regional General Manager Gas Authority Of India Limited, Raigarh OfÏce At Hotel Trinity 2nd Floor, Near Kotra Road, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Shri C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Khulesh Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent No. 3 &4 : Shri Sandeep Dubey, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2025.03.12 21:36:02 +0530 2 11.03.2025 1. By the present petition, the petitioner who is claiming to be the owner of land bearing Khasra No. 520/3 area of 0.140 hectare situated at village Dhanagar Tahsil and District Raigarh preferred the present writ petition seeking following reliefs:- 1. That, Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to restrain the respondent authorities particularly respondent no. 3 & 4 to do any activities regarding laying of gas pipe line in the land of the petitioner. 2. Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper may also be passed in favour of the petitioner together with cost of the petition. 2. After filing of the writ petition, on advance copy the respondent no. 3 & 4 by placing a reply submits that on the date of notification the original land owner namely Bajrang was their in the revenue record and on the basis of the said record, the proceedings were drawn under the Act namely the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (for short, the ‘PMP Act, 1962). After the issuance of notification under Section 3 & 6 when the use of land was notified, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner whose name has been recorded on 06.06.2024 by mutation proceeding. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 & 4 would submit that the provision of Section 11 (4) of the PMP Act, 1962 is very clear when several persons claimed to be interested in the amount of compensation deposited under sub-section (1) the competent authority shall determine the persons who in its opinion are entitled 3 to receive the compensation and the amount payable to each of them and the writ petition can be disposed of by direction to the petitioner to approach the competent authority as prescribed under Section 11 & 12 of PMP Act, 1962. 4. I have heard both the parties and perused the pleadings of both the parties and the specific provision prescribed under Section 11 of the PMP Act, 1962. The provision of Section 11 reads as follows:- “11. Deposit and payment of compensation. (1) The amount of compensation determined under section 10 shall be deposited by the Central Government, the State Government or the corporation, as the case may be, with the competent authority within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed. (2) If the amount of compensation is not deposited within the time prescribed under sub-section (1), the Central Government, the State Government or the corporation, as the case may be, shall be liable to pay interest thereon at the rate of six per cent. per annum from the date on which the compensation had to be deposited till the date of the actual deposit. (3) As soon as may be after the compensation has been deposited under sub-section (1) the competent authority shall, on behalf of the Central Government the State Government or the corporation, as the case may be, pay the compensation to the persons entitled thereto. (4) Where several persons claim to be interested in the amount of compensation deposited under sub-section (1), the competent authority shall determined the persons who in its opinion are entitled to receive the compensation and the amount payable to each of them. (5) If any dispute arises as to the apportionment of the compensation or any part thereof or as to the persons to 4 whom the same or any part thereon is payable, the competent authority shall refer the dispute to the decision of the District Judge within the limits of whose jurisdiction the land or any part thereof is situated and the decision of the District Judge thereon shall be final”. 5. From perusal of pleadings and the provision of Section 11 of the Act, it appears that the dispute presently is about the disbursal of the compensation amount to the petitioner or to the earlier land owner, hence the petitioner may approach the competent authority by filing an application under Section 11(4). On the event of such filing of application before the Competent Authority under the PMP Act, 1962. The said application be decided by the Competent Authority in accordance with law by providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the earlier land owner in whose name the notification has been issued. 6. With the aforesaid direction and observation, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Shoaib