1 2025:CGHC:50617 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5310 of 2025 Nileshkant Swarnkar S/o Shri Ramkumar Swarnkar Aged About 50 Years Residing At Gali No. 3, Shikshak Nagar, Durg, Durg, Tahsil And District- Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi, Bhawan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) - 492002 2 -The Commissioner Durg, Division Durg (C.G.) 3 -The Collector Durg District- Durg (C.G.) 4 -The Tahsildar Durg Tahsil And District- Durg (C.G.) 5 - National Highways Authority Of India Through Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, Raipur, Shivraj Greens F-5 Block Dhamtari, Road, Raipur (C.G.) -493773 ... Respondent(s) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Anurag Tripathi, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, PL For Respondent No.5 : Mr. Garry Mukhopadhyay, Advocate (on advance copy) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 10.10.2025 2 1. With the consent of the parties, matter is heard finally. 2. This writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs: “10.1. That, this Hon'ble court may call the entire records of the proceedings; 10.2. That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction quashing the impugned arbitrary rejection order dated 29/04/2025 of the Commissioner/competent authority passed on technical grounds relating to wrong section/Act mentioned and grant liberty to the Petitioner to file a fresh arbitration application under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956, ог permit amendments as necessary.; 10.3. That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction to the respondent authorities to decide the pending representation made by the Petitioner for removal occupation/construction of on unauthorized Khasra No. 1080/2 and restore possession of the remaining land to the Petitioner forthwith; 10.4. That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction to the respondent authorities to pay adequate compensation to the Petitioner for the period during which the occupation by the NHAI/project contractor continued. on the remaining land, including interest, as per law. 10.5. That, any other relief(s,) that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to grant in the interest of Justice; together with the cost of the petition.” 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the instant petition has been filed challenging the impugned rejection order dated 29/04/2025 passed by the Commissioner/Competent 3 Authority on the technical grounds relating to wrong Section/Act and granted liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh arbitration application under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (Act of 1956) or permit the amendments as necessary. Learned Counsel further contended that on 30/03/2016, land bearing Khasra No.1082/2 (area 0.07 hectares) situated at village - Purai, Patwari Halka No. 54, Tehsil and District Durg, was purchased by the petitioner through a registered sale deed. On 19/05/2016, land bearing Khasra No.1080/3 rakba 0.06 hectare was also purchased by the petitioner through a registered sale deed. However, the alleged land of the petitioner has been acquired by the concerned respondent-authority for the project of the National Highways Authority of India and award has been passed on 25.02.2019. Against said award, on 19.09.2025 petitioner has filed an appeal/arbitration application before the concerned Authority, which has been rejected by the impugned order dated 29.04.2025 on the technical grounds. Learned Counsel further contended that since the award with regard to the alleged land has already been passed by the concerned Authority and petitioner wants to withdraw the said award under protest. Hence, petitioner came-up before this Court with aforementioned prayer. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents contended that copy of award has not been annexed/filed by the petitioner in this writ 4 petition. If petitioner wants to file the arbitration case in that situation, he is having no objection. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Considering facts of the case, nature of relief, above submissions of counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of at this stage permitting the petitioner to file an arbitration case under Section 3G(5) of the Act of 1956 before the concerned Commissioner and in-turn Commissioner shall consider and decide the same, expeditiously, in accordance with relevant rule/law/regulation and if it is found that any compensation has been deposited/awarded in favour of the petitioner, same shall be disburse to the petitioner, subject to verification. CC as per rules. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-