1 2025:CGHC:10840 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2079 of 2019 1 - Marshal Kujur S/o Francis Aged About 67 Years R/o Village Katajhariya, Tahsil Tamnar, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - Agipat S/o Histfan Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Katajhariya, Tahsil Tamnar, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 3 - Manohar S/o Lukes Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Katajhariya, Tahsil Tamnar, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management Mantralaya Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Land Acquisition Officer Cum Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Gharghoda, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 4 - National Thermal Power Corporation Regional Office At Magnato Offizo Conclave Iii And Iv Floor G E Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioners : Ms. Apurva Nigam, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Kamal Kishore Patel, Advocate. For Respondents/ State : Shri Lav Sharma, P.L. For Respondent No.4 : Shri Anuroop Panda, Advocate. Digitally signed by SMT NIRMALA RAO -2- Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 05.03.2025 1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct respondent-authorities for issuance of new notification on priority and further for payment of compensation to the petitioners on the basis of new notification. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly direct the respondent-authorities for taking decision upon the representation of the petitioners and for recalculating the compensation on the basis of new notification and payment of the difference amount to the petitioner in light of new notification. 10.3 Any other relief/ order may also be granted that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the lands of the petitioners were acquired by the State Government for the National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC). She would contend that an award was passed in favour of the petitioners on 6.2.2016. She would further argue that in WP(C) No.1649 of 2017, decided on 30.10.2018, the Hon’ble Division Bench stayed the notification dated 4.12.2014 issued by the State Government under Section 30(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short ‘the Act, 2013’) and also issued a direction to apply a multiplier of 2 while calculating the compensation. She would contend that a notification was issued by the State Government in this regard on 3 2.5.2019. It is argued that the respondent authorities be directed to calculate the amount of compensation afresh by applying the multiplier of 2. She would further submit that a specific direction was issued in WP(C) No.1649 of 2017 (Smt. Anita Agrawal vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.) and other connected matters in this regard. 3. On the other hand, learned counsels for the respondents would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners. They would submit that the lands of the petitioners were acquired by the State Government for NTPC. They would contend that an award was passed on 6.2.2016 and compensation was also paid to the petitioners, which they accepted without any demur. They would contend that the subsequent orders or decisions of the Superior Courts would not extend benefits in favour of the petitioners. They would further submit that the observation made in paragraph 12 of the order in WP(C) No.1649 of 2017 was later deleted. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents present on the record. 5. Admittedly, vide order dated 6.2.2016, compensation was paid to the petitioners. This petition was filed by the petitioners on 18.6.2019, after the pronouncement of the judgment passed in WP(C) No.1649 of 2017. In paragraph 12, the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Smt. Anita Agrawal (supra) held as under:- "12. It goes without saying that all awards and compensations in relation to not only these Petitioners but -4- all such persons whose lands have been acquired and a multiplier of 1.00 has been used for calculating the compensation, the same will be required to be revised and revisited in light to the new notification, which is required to be notified by the State Government, on priority." 6. The review petitions were filed before the Hon’ble Division Bench by the State of Chhattisgarh. In paragraph 6, the Hon’ble Division Bench passed an order to delete paragraph 12 of the order passed in WP(C) No.1649 of 2017. Paragraph 6 of the order reads as follows:- “6. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on an earlier occasion, it was doubted whether the declaration/ direction given as per paragraph 12 was ever prayed for in any of the writ petitions. Today, during the course of hearing, it is conceded by the learned counsel appearing for the parties that, it was never a prayer in the writ petition, but for individual grievances of the writ Petitioners in respect of which, relief has been granted based on the reasoning given in the judgment as disclosed from paragraph 1 to 11.” 7. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners accepted the amount of compensation, and the claim of the petitioners in the present petition is based on paragraph 12 of the order passed in WP(C) No.1649 of 2017, which has already been deleted by the Hon’ble Division Bench in Review Petition No.190 of 2019 and other connected matters, no case is made out for interference. 8. Accordingly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi