SANJAY AGRAWAL v. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
WPC/1981/2020 · 2025-05-06
Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Writ Petition (Civil)body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22459 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22459 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 2025:CGHC:21034 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP(C) No. 1981 of 2020 1 - Sanjay Agrawal S/o Late Ramchandra Agrawal Aged About 46 Years R/o Sbi Colony, Shirikant Verma Marg Bilaspur Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
... Petitioner versus 1 - National Highway Authority Of India Through Its Chairman, G 5 And 6, Sector 10 Dwarka, New Delhi, District : New Delhi, Delhi 2 - The Project Director National Highway Authority Of India, Abhilasha Parisar, Hig 62, Behind New Bus Stand, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District
:
Bilaspur,
Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Officer-Cum-Land Acquisition Officer Bilaspur District Bilaspur
Chhattisgarh,
District
:
Bilaspur,
Chhattisgarh 4 - Nayab Tahsildar Sakri, Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner : Shri G.S. Patel, Advocate holding the brief of Shri D.L. Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondents No.1 & 2 : Ms. Sushma Gupta, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Dheeraj Wankhede, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Lav Sharma, P.L. SMT NIRMALA RAO
-2- Hon'ble Shri Justice
Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board 07.05.2025
1.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that during pendency of this petition, a fresh award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 4.10.2021. He would contend that the said award is now the subject matter of arbitration proceedings pending before the Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur. Therefore, the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to raise all available grounds before the said authority. He would further submit that a direction be issued to the Arbitrator to conclude the proceedings, at the earliest.
2. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner.
3. Heard counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents present on record.
4. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the Arbitrator to decide the pending arbitration proceedings expeditiously. Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
Judge Nimmi