1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1314 of 2025 1 - Anita Agrawal W/o Shri Ashok Agrawal Aged About 55 Years R/o Kranti Nagar, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Secretary, Department Of Irrigation, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Land Acquistion Officer- Cum-Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WPC No. 1420 of 2025 VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR Date: 2025.05.08 12:47:37 +0530 2 1 - Ashok Agrawal S/o Late Shri Jagmohan Das Agrawal Aged About 69 Years R/o Kranti Nagar, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Secretary Department Of Irrigation, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector, Bilaspur District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Land Acquisition Officer-Cum-Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Executive Engineer Water Resources Department, Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WPC No. 1956 of 2025 1 - M/s Adhiraj Infrastates Private Limited Through Special Power Of Attorney Holder Santosh Kumar Shrivastava S/o Avdhesh Kumar Shrivastava Aged About 50 Years, R/o- House No. B-19, Rama Life City, Sakri Bilaspur District-Bilaspur (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 2 - Collector Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Bilha District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department Division Kota District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Amrito Das, & Mr. Krishna Tondon, Advocates For State : Mr. R.K. Gupta, Addl. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 07/05/2025 1. Since common question of facts and law is involved in these cases, as such, all these petitions are being disposed off by this common order. 2. The petitioners have prayed for certain reliefs in the writ petitions. Though there are some sort of differences in respect of prayer made by the petitioners in all the petitions, however, in sum and substance, the reliefs are altogether similar and identical. The reliefs prayed in WPC No. 1314/2025 (Anita Agrawal vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others) are quoted hereinbelow:- 4 “10.1. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent authorities to appoint Presiding Officer, Land Acquisition within the Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority forthwith in accordance with the provisions of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 10.2. Any other or further release which the court may fit in the interest of justice.” 3. The petitioners filed these writ petitions challenging the inaction of the respondent authorities in appointing a Presiding Officer to the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Authority. Due to this vacancy (since 01.01.2024), the petitioners have been unable to get fair compensation for land compulsorily acquired in 2017 under the Arpa Bhaisajhar Baraj project. Despite approaching various forums, including the Supreme Court, the matter remains unresolved due to the vacant statutory post. The petitioners argue this delay violates their constitutional rights under Article 300A of the Constitution of India. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the inaction of the respondent authorities in appointing the Presiding Officer is arbitrary and unconstitutional, violating Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India. It defeats the purpose of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, which mandates speedy dispute resolution 5 and fair compensation. Sections 51 and 52 of the Act provides for appointing the Presiding Officer of the State Government. The failure to do so deprives landowners warranting intervention by the Hon’ble Court. 5. Learned State counsel submits the only relevant issue is the appointment of the Presiding Officer in the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement Authority, for which an advertisement was issued on 04/04/2025 and the process is going on. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the parties, this Court expresses hope and trust that the prescribed authority, i.e., the Presiding Officer, shall be appointed by the State Government within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), the present petitions are disposed of. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha