1 2025:CGHC:52887 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5643 of 2025 1 - Santosh Pal Kishore S/o Sukhram Kishore (Satnami), Aged About 47 Years R/o- Village- Chisda, Tahsil Hasoud P.S. Hasoud, District Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector, Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.) 4 - Sub Divisional Officer (R)/ Land Acquisition Officer Sakti, Distt. Sakti (C.G.) 5 - Executive Engineer (B/R), Public Works Department, Division Sakti, Distt. Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. F.S Khare, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 30 /10/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/ order/ direction, directing the respondent no. 3 Collector Sakti to refer the case of petitioner forthwith to the leaned Tribunal constituted u/s 51 of the Land Acquisition Act 2013 for decision in accordance with law. 10.2 That, if the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to petitioner's matter. SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2025.11.01 11:54:57 +0530 2 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief (s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that being aggrieved with the award dated 28/11/2024 passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, the petitioner has submitted an application dated 22/04/2025 under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (henceforth ‘the Act, 2013’), which is pending consideration and no decision has been taken on it, therefore, direction be issued to the Respondent No. 3/ Collector, District Sakti to pass appropriate order on his application and refer the dispute to the competent authority. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents/ State would submit that as the petitioner is not making any submission on the merits of the case and only seeking a direction to the respondent No.2 to take decision on the pending application (Annexure P/2) submitted by him, he is not having any objection to the limited prayer made by the petitioner. He would further submit that if the application is still pending consideration, it will be considered and decided in accordance with law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. The submission made by counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner, after passing of the award, has submitted an application under Section 64 of the Act of 2013 is pending consideration. The first proviso to Section 64(1) of the Act of 2013 prescribes time limit for taking decision on the application submitted under Section 64 is of 30 days. 6. In view of the above provision and considering the fact that the application purportedly filed under Section 64 in the month of April, 2025 much more time than of 30 days has already been expired, the respondent No.3 is directed to take decision on the application (Annexure P/2) submitted by 3 the petitioner expeditiously and in accordance with law, preferably within a further period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge S.Bhilwar