1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2879 of 2020 1 - Ganesh Ram Yadav S/o Late Rathram Yadav Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Taga, Police Station Mulmula, Tahsil, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya , Atal Nagar, Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Sub Divisional Officer (R) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Janjgir , District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 3 - Deputy General Manager Power Grid Corporation Of India Limited, Taga, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. N.K. Chatterjee, Advocate For State : Mr. Vedant Shadangi, PL For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Vaibhav Shukla, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 23.06.2025 1. Heard on admission. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the writ petition and be pleased to grant the interest @ 9% per annum from the date of acquisition dated 30.11.2012 and also to grant the compensation for the standing trees separately which is still unpaid. 10.2 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court -2- deems fit and proper may also be passed in favour of the petitioner together with cost of the petition.” 3. Mr. Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the part of the land of the petitioner bearing Survey No.74/2 and 77/2 admeasuring 0.62 acres situated at Village Taga, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) was acquired by respondent No.3/Power Grid Corporation for erecting High Tension Tower. He would further submit that an order to make payment of compensation to the tune of Rs.6,37,437/- was passed on 30.11.2012 but it was paid to the petitioner on 21.01.2019 and immediately, thereafter this petition was filed. He would contend that the petitioner is entitled to receive interest on delayed payments of compensation. 4. On the other hand, learned counsels appearing for the respondents would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Chatterjee. They would submit that the present petition is not maintainable as according to the provisions of Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (for short ‘the Act of 1885’), the petitioner ought to have moved an application before the concerned District Judge. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 6. Taking into consideration the fact that though the award was passed on 30.11.2012 but the amount of compensation was paid to the petitioner on 21.01.2019 and apparently, there was a delay of about 7 years in payment of compensation. The petitioner may claim interest for the delayed payment by filing an application 3 before the learned District Judge according to the provisions of Section 16(3) of the Act of 1885. 7. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to move an application before the concerned District Judge according to the provisions of Section 16(3) of the Act of 1885 and if such an application is moved, the concerned Court is directed to decide the application expeditiously preferably within a period of 120 days from today. 8. The petitioner as well as the respondents would be at liberty to raise all available grounds before the learned District Judge. 9. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 10.Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of at the admission stage. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha