1 2024:CGHC:37425 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2822 of 2016 1 - Upasana Upadhyay D/o Martand Dev Uapdhyay, Aged About 25 Years R/o Ashok Nagar, Birkona Road, Sarkanda Thana Sarkanda Tahsil, Civil And Revenue Distrct Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - N.T.P.C. Through The Secretary Scope Complex, 7 Institutional Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003, Delhi 2 - N.T.P.C. Through The Manager, Sipat Super Thermal Power Porject, P.O. Ujjawal Nagar, Civil And Revenue Distirct Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Sub Divisional Officer Bilaspur Civil And Revenue Distirct Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, Advocate. For Res./NTPC : Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate. For State : Mr. Pramod Shrivastava, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 16/06 /2025 1. The petitioner who is grand-daughter of Late Hari Prasad Upadhyay who land has been utilized for installing pipeline by the NTPC for flowing water from land to plant, has filed this writ petition for issuance of direction to the respondents to enhance the amount of compensation as well as to grant employment as land oustees person. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a nominal compensation Rs. 14,525/- has been given to her grandfather for acquiring the land of the petitioner for the purpose of laying down the pipeline. He would further submit that the pipeline has been laid down ARUN KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR DEWANGAN Date: 2025.06.18 12:37:08 +0530 2 over the field of the petitioner which has destroyed whole agriculture land whereas a nominal compensation has been given and no employment has been given to the petitioner hence he would pray for allowing the writ petition by issuing the direction to the respondent authorities to enhance the compensation as well as for grant of employment. 3. Respondents No. 1 & 2 have filed their return denying the allegation made in the petition mainly contending that no loss has been caused by them to the property of the petitioner and they have installed the pipeline below the petitioner’s land which has been been utilized for the same and no property or crop has been lost by them. It has been further stated that they have already paid compensation to the tune of Rs. 14,525/- to petitioner’s grandfather for utilizing the land for pipeline, therefore, the petitioner has no right to file this writ petition as no right has been adversely affected and would pray for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. Rebutting the submission made by the respondent, the petitioner would submit that the said land is utilizing by her for agriculture operation and because of installation of the pipeline by the respondent, a huge loss of property and crop have been caused and would pray for allowing the writ petition. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record with utmost satisfaction. 6. From perusal of record, it is quite vivid that the petitioner’s land was utilized for installation of pipeline below the earth. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the standing crop of paddy has been lost due to installation of pipeline by the respondent but he has not 3 placed any material on record to show the loss caused to the crop, thus, very vague allegations have been made without any factual foundation by the petitioner in this writ petition. 7. Considering the fact that no document has been placed by the petitioner regarding damage to crop by the respondent due to installation of pipeline and also the fact that the respondent has already paid amount of Rs. 14,525/- for utilization of petitioner’s land, nothing is required to be adjudicating in this petition at this stage. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition sans merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Arun