1 2025:CGHC:53172-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 643 of 2025 Vikas Agrawal S/o Shri S.N. Agrawal Aged About 55 Years R/o Radiant Public School, Nimora Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Revenue Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Capital Complex, Naya Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Sub- Divisional Officer Revenue Cum-Land Acquisition Officer Arang/Abhanpur, Headquarter/ District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Naya Raipur Development Authority Through The Chief Executive Officer Naya Raipur Development Authority, Prayavas- Bhawan North Block- Sector-19 Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Appellants : Ms. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. YS Thakur, Addl AG with Mr. Sangarsh Pandey, GA. For Respondent No.4 : Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge 2 Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 31.10.2025 1. Heard, Mr. Keshav Dewangan, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. YS Thakur, Addl AG and Mr. Anuroop Panda, learned counsel for respondent No.4/NRDA and perused the writ appeal. 2. Appellants have filed this writ appeal with following prayer: “ a). Quash and set aside Para-102 of the judgment dated 04.04.2025 passed by the Hon'ble Single Bench in W.P.(C) No. 2520/2017, to the extent it permits the respondents to recover the compensation paid to the petitioners alongwith 7% per annum interest. b) Prohibit the respondents from recovering any interest on the compensation amount paid to the petitioners, considering the petitioner’s deprivation of land use and the respondents’ commercial exploitation of the acquired land. c) Grant any other relief(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. Mr. Anuroop Panda, learned counsel for respondent No.4/NRDA states that as has been observed by the learned Single Judge in Para 102 of the impugned judgment that if the respondent-authority requires any land for public purpose under the new Act of 2013, (Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013), in accordance with law, then they are at liberty to draw fresh proceeding of land acquisition and the statement at Bar has 3 been made that the respondent-authority requires the land. 4. 4. In view of above statement made by learned counsel for respondent No.4, present writ appeal stands disposed of. CC as per rules. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice J.