1 2025:CGHC:28127 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 590 of 2021  Gulab Singh S/o Dewprasad, Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Bhainsbod, Tehsil Bilha District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur District - Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Collector Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3. Sub - Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Bilha District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Ms. Apurva Nigam, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. K.K. Patel, Advocate For State : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Agrawal, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 26. 06.2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- “10.1 That this Hon’ble Court kindly be pleased to direct the respondent land acquisition officer for taking decision on representation of the petitioner regarding claim of U/s 33 of Act, 2013, 10.2 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the land of the SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.06.26 17:18:33 +0530 2 petitioner bearing survey No. 38/3 admeasuring area 0.11 acre situated at village Bhainsbod, Tahsil Bilha, District Bilaspur was acquired by the respondents and award was passed on 21.10.2016. She would further submit that the petitioner moved an application under Section 33 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short “Act, 2013”) before respondent No. 3 on 25.03.2017 for enhancement of compensation, but till date the said application has not been decided. She would also submit that respondent No. 3 may be directed to decide the application expeditiously. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Agrawal, Panel Lawyer appearing for the State would oppose. 4. Heard. 5. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by Ms. Nigam, this petition, at this juncture, is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 3 to decide the pending application of the petitioner moved under Section 33 of the Act, 2013, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 120 days from today. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 7. With the aforesaid observation(s), the instant petition is hereby disposed of, at admission stage itself. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant