1 2025:CGHC:48935 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5079 of 2025 1 - Bedram Verma S/o Late Shri Bhagwati Prasad Verma, Aged About 64 Years R/o Village Raveli, Ward No. 10., Tehsil Suhela, District Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Union Of India Through The Secretary - Ministry Of Railway Office At New Delhi 2 - Engineer-In-Chief South Eastern Central Railway Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (R),/ Land Acquisition Officer Simga, District - Baloda-Bazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) 4 - Patwari, Village Raveli, P.H. No. 38, Tehsil Suhela, District - Baloda-Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) 5 - Gram Panchayat Through The Sarpanch, Village Raveli, Tehsil Suhela, District - Baloda- Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) 6 - Shree Cement Pvt. Limited Company, Through General Manager Village Khaprideeh, District - Baloda-Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Purnendra Khichariya along with Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 & 2 For Respondent State : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSGI along with Mr. Niraj Baghel, CIC Mrs. Poorva Tiwari Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 24/09/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition on the following reliefs: “10.1. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash and set-aside the impugned gazette publication dated 16.06.2025 (Annexure P/1) and schedule dated 04.09.2025 (Annexure P/3) and notice 2 dated 25.08.2025 (Annexure P/4) and the entire land acquisition proceeding initiate out of notification dated 16.06.2025. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to quash the proposed acquisition proceedings in respect of petitioner land be immediately quashed. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to detailed inquiry be conducted to ascertain whether the beneficiary of the rail corridor is a private company as contemplated under Section 20d fo the Railway Act. 10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to consider a personal hearing under Section 20 D(2) and a legal and speaking order with respect to land acquisition before taking any further action. 10.5 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances fo the present case including cost of the petition.” 2. Learned counsels for the petitioner prays for a direction to 3 respondent no. 3 to decide the objections filed by the petitioner, in accordance with law within a time frame. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 3 to decide the objections filed by the petitioner in accordance with law, if not already decided. 4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the counsels for the respective parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that instead of keeping this petition pending, it is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 3 to decide the objections filed by the petitioner, in accordance with law, rules and regulations, subject to verification, within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if not already decided. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the case. 7. Certified copy today. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima