1 2025:CGHC:3960 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1310 of 2019 1. Ram Lakhan Rathore S/o Shri Jeevan Lal Rathore Aged About 64 Years R/o Saragaon, Tahsil Champa, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh 2. Krishna Awatar S/o Shri Jeevan Lal Rathore Aged About 48 Years R/o Saragaon, Tahsil Champa, District Jajgir-Champa Chhattisgarh ... Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Revenue New Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Collector, District Jajgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 3. The Union of India Bhartiya Rastriya Rajmarg Pradhikaran, Pot Parivahan Through Engineer In Chief, Public Works Department, National Highway Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 4. The Sub Divisional Officer (Rev.) Cum Prescribed Authority Land Acquisition Officer, Champa, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 5. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, National Highway Division, Champa, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattigarh 6. The Upper Commissioner / Arbitrator Bilaspur Division Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate For Respondents No. 1, 2 & 4 & 6 : Mr. Lav Sharma, Panel Lawyer For Respondents No. 3 & 5 : Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 22/01/2025 1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI 2 “10.1 Call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the Petitioners for its kind perusal. 10.2 The Respondent Authorities concerned be directed to decide the application / representation filed by the Petitioners (Annexure P-1) in compliance of the order dated 10.11.2017, passed by the Respondent No. 6 and grant them proper compensation, within stipulated period, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, any other relief, this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper may also be granted to the Petitioners, in the interest of justice.” 2. Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Patel, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the lands of the petitioners were acquired by the National Highways Authority for the construction of a road bearing Survey No. 306/4 admeasuring 0.194 hectares, situated Village Saragaon, Patwari Circle No. 13, Tehsil Champa, District Janjgir-Champa. He would further submit that the award was passed on 30.07.2016. He would also submit that an application was moved for enhancement of compensation before the Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division and the same was partly allowed vide order dated 10.11.2017. He would contend that an application was moved pursuant to the order passed by the Additional Commissioner before respondent No. 4 on 04.12.2017, but till date, the same has not been considered and decided. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan, learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 3 and 5 would submit that against the order passed by the Additional Commissioner dated 10.11.2017, an appeal has been preferred before the appropriate authority which was disposed of. He would further submit that the petitioners ought to have filed an application according to the provisions of Section 36 of the 3 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the jurisdictional Civil Court and therefore, the petition is not maintainable. 4. Mr. Lav Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for respondents No. 1, 2, 4 and 6 would support the submissions made by Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 6. Admittedly, an order was passed by the Additional Commissioner thereby enhancing the compensation vide order dated 10.11.2017. The petitioners made a representation before respondent No. 4 on 04.12.2017, but till date, the same has not been decided. It is stated by counsel for respondents No. 3 and 5 that an appeal against the award passed by the Additional Commissioner dated 10.11.2017 was preferred which was disposed of, but no document has been placed on record to demonstrate whether the appeal was dismissed or allowed. 7. Taking into consideration the facts discussed above, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 4 to decide the pending application of the petitioner dated 04.12.2017 preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. With the aforesaid direction(s) / observation(s), the petition is disposed of. 9. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti