1 / 3 2025:CGHC:56897 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 6132 of 2025 Birish Lal S/o Amar Sai Aged About 55 Years Village Badgaon, Tehsil Ajgarbahar, P.S. Lemru, Distt. Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Irrigation Department Atal Nagar New Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector Korba, Distt. Korba, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Sub Divisional Office Korba, Distt. Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Ramakant Pandey, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. Advocate General SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 24/11/2025 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs: Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2025.11.28 11:05:28 +0530 2 / 3 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to forthwith compute the compensation in lieu of land of petitioner and pay the same, with interest from the date of taking possession to its realization, as per Section 11, 26, 28, 30 & 80 of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to provide Compensation with interest to the family member of petitioner in lieu of acquired land as per The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 from Respondent authorities. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in favour of petitioner, may also be granted.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when land was recorded in the name of petitioner’s father bearing kh. no.12/1 admeasuring 0.75 acres, some portion of land was acquired by respondent authority in the year 1991, however, no compensation has been paid in this regard. He contended that petitioner approached the authorities and made oral request, however, it was not considered and therefore a direction be issued to respondent authority to consider claim of petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the State opposes the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and would submit that in the writ petition, there is no pleading that petitioner has submitted any written representation/application before the competent authority nor any 3 / 3 document in this regard has been enclosed along with writ petition and therefore submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that claim of petitioner was not considered cannot be accepted at this stage. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed along with writ petition. 5. On due consideration of submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties, this writ petition at this stage is disposed off permitting the petitioner to submit fresh representation before respondents No. 2 & 3 and if such representation is submitted, concerned authority shall take decision on representation in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of representation. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of claim of petitioner and the authority will be at liberty to consider claim of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law, on its own merit. Sd/- Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen