1 2025:CGHC:7903 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 883 of 2025 1 - Gajanand Verma S/o Late Kriparam Verma Aged About 58 Years R/o Village Kanteli, P.S. And Tahsil Bemetara, District- Bemetara (C.G.) 2 - Gajju S/o Late Kriparam Verma Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Kanteli, P.S. And Tahsil Bemetara, District- Bemetara (C.G.) 3 - Smt. Krishna Verma W/o Anjor Verma Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Kanteli, P.S. And Tahsil Bemetara, District- Bemetara (C.G.) 4 - Smt. Amrika Verma W/o Balram Verma Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Kanteli, P.S. And Tahsil Bemetara, District- Bemetara (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Union of India Through The Secretary Department Of Road Transport And Highways, New Delhi 2 - The Chief Engineer, National Highway Zone, Raipur, District Raipur(C.G.) 3 - The Collector, Bemetara, District- Bemetara (C.G.) 4 - Sub Divisional Officer (R) And Land Acquisition Officer Bemetara, Tehsil And District- Bemetara (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajkumar Pali, Advocate For Respondent(s)/ State : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No.2. : Mr. Aniruddha Shrivastava, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocate AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.02.17 17:11:00 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 14/02/2025 1. By the present writ petitions, the petitioner is seeking following reliefs:- (i) this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record from the possession of the respondent authorities pertaining to the case of the petitioners for its kind perusal. (ii) this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and directed respondent authorities to given proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pay compensation amount to them in accordance with law in the light of acquired their land with interest of 18%. (iii) Any other relief or reliefs which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit or proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost of the litigation. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the award passed by the respondent No.4 is contrary to the principles and guidelines framed by this Court in the matter of Ashutosh Agrawal Vs. Union of India in WA No.07/2019 decided on 06/12/2019. The competent authority/SDO(Revenue) without applying the principles laid down by this Court in Ashutosh Agrawal (supra) has passed the award and quantify the compensation. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent/N.H.A.I. would submit that 3 the similar issue has been taken into consideration and the writ petition and writ appeal have been decided by directing such petitioners who have questioned the award on the ground of non-application of the guidelines and principles laid down by the division Bench in WA. No.7/2019 to approach the Arbitrator under Section 3G (5) of the National Highways Act, 1956. He refers the order dated 12/03/2021 in WA No.423/2020, order dated 10/12/2024 in WA No.140/2022 and order dated 26/11/2024 in WA No.9/2021. He further submits that against the order dated 06/12/2019 in WA No.07/2019 of this Court one SLP No.16756-16757/2023 is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, however, there is no stay to the order passed by this Court in WA No.07/2019. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings of the petitioner as well as the contentions raised by counsel for the petitioner and for the N.H.A.I./respondent. 5. From perusal of reliefs sought by the petitioner herein shows that the petitioner is raising grievance towards the quantum of amount of compensation as the guidelines framed by the division Bench of this Court in WA No.07/2019 has not been taken care while passing the award. 6. There is no dispute with regard to the Act, under which, lands of the petitioner was acquired. Bare perusal of the relief as extracted above would show that grievance raised by the petitioner is with regard to the quantum of amount of 4 compensation. Under Section 3G (5) of the Act, 1956, the Central Government appoints an Arbitrator for deciding the grievance of either parties with respect to the amount of compensation. 7. As the present writ petition is also questioning the quantum of compensation, hence, the division Bench of this Court on various occasions i.e. while deciding the Writ Appeals Nos. 423/2020, 140/2022 and 9/2021 has disposed of various writ petitions directing the land owners to approach and avail the remedy available under Section 3G (5) of the Act, 1956 by filing appropriate application in this regard. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate application before the Arbitrator under Section 3G (5) of the Act, 1956 within a period of four weeks and in case, the petitioner approach the Arbitrator by filing an appeal under Section 3G (5) of the Act, 1956, the Arbitrator to decide the dispute/appeal of the petitioner preferably within a further period of three months in accordance with law keeping in mind the order passed by this Court in WA No.07/2019. 8. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep