Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28765 (CHH)

RAMCHARAN VERMA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/3191/2025 · 2025-06-24

Shri Arvind Kumar Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 3 2025:CGHC:27614 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3191 of 2025 1 - Ramcharan Verma S/o Milan Verma Aged About 55 Years 2 - Shatruhan Lal Verma S/o Manrakhan Verma Aged About 65 Years 3 - Jitendra Kumar S/o Santosh Kumar Aged About 38 Years 4 - Shyamcharan Verma S/o Lakhanlal Verma Aged About 55 Years 5 - Keshav Verma S/o Shyamcharan Verma Aged About 35 Years 6 - Badku Das S/o Parasram Aged About 58 Years 7 - Gendram Sahu S/o Bisahuram Sahu Aged About 65 Years 8 - Baliram S/o Amol Singh Aged About 72 Years 9 - Rupnath Sahu S/o Bisahu Sahu Aged About 70 Years 10 - Smt. Uttra Bai W/o Narsingh Verma Aged About 52 Years 11 - Smt. Sarojani Bai W/o Dhaniram Aged About 46 Years 12 - Khubchand Verma S/o Sudarshan Verma Aged About 42 Years 13 - Smt. Godawari Verma W/o Sudarshan Verma Aged About 60 Years All Residents of Village Parsada, P.S. Nandghat, Tahsil Nandghat, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh). 14 -Jayant Satnami S/o Amol Satnami Aged About 36 Years 15 -Ramkumar Dhruw S/o Shobhit Dhruw Aged About 66 Years 16 -Tirathram Verma S/o Punitram Verma Aged About 64 Years 17 - Ramavtar Verma S/o Janakram Verma Aged About 73 Years 18 - Ramnaresh Bandhey S/o Beduram Aged About 42 Years 19 - Bishun S/o Radhelal Aged About 40 Years 20 - Leelaram Verma S/o Shivprasad Verma Aged About 37 Years 21 - Kanhaiyaram Yadav S/o Ramji Yadav Aged About 48 Years 22 - Ghasiyaram Verma S/o Anandram Verma Aged About 62 Years ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.06.28 13:40:08 +0530 2 / 3 23 - Abhay Ram Verma S/o Adhar Verma Aged About 61 Years 24 - Bhuwan Sahu S/o Mitthulal Sahu Aged About 56 Years 25 - Tikaram Verma S/o Sudhram Verma Aged About 26 Years 26 - Madho Yadav S/o Ramji Yadav Aged About 42 Years 27 - Lal Bahadur Sahu S/o Khorbahara Sahu Aged About 65 Years All R/o Village Nagdha, P.S. Nandghat, Tahsil Nandghat, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 – State of Chhattisgarh The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 4 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Nawagarh, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 6 - Assistant Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Nawagarh, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 7 - Tahsildar Tahsil Nawagarh, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. C.K. Sahu, Advocate For State : Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 25/06/2025 1. By way of the instant petition the petitioners are challenging the quantum of compensation and they allege that the very low 3 / 3 compensation has been granted to the petitioners in lieu of acquisition of their land in the year 2004-2005. 2. Earlier the petitioners have filed a writ petition bearing WPC No.3570 of 2022 wherein this Court has disposed of the said writ petition by order dated 23/08/2022 with a direction to the petitioners to make representation before the concerned respondent and the respondents were directed to decide the same within six months. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioners have moved a representation before the concerned respondent authorities and the respondent authorities while deciding the said representation have not followed the provisions of Section 25 of the CGLRC. Hence this petition. 3. Learned State counsel would submit that the petitioners have the alternative remedy of filing reference under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 4. Considering the fact that the petitioners have alternative remedy of filing reference under Section 64 of the Act, 2013, the petitioners are granted liberty to avail the alternative remedy of filing reference. 5. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu