1 2026:CGHC:10461 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 892 of 2026 Ganesh Prasad Porte S/o Ramdin Porte Aged About 64 Years Village- Gaitara Post- Ketka, Tahsil - Surajpur District- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - South Eastern Coalfield Limited Through- Chairman-Cum Managing Director South Eastern Coalfield Limited Head Quarter Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - South Eastern Coalfield Limited South Eastern Coalfield Limited Bishrampur Area, District- Surajpur (C.G.) 3 - Project Office South Eastern Coalfield Limited Bishrampur Area District- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. KPS Gandhi, Mr. Vikram Gupta and Ms. Neela Gupta, Advocates For Respondents : Mr. Vinod Kumar Deshmukh, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 27.02.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking following reliefs:- “(i). In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner most respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to: (ii) Direct respondent SECL to forthwith release and pay the compensation amount and employment benefit as per BINI PRADEEP Digitally signed by BINI PRADEEP Date: 2026.02.28 16:38:42 +0530 2 Statement – 1A pertaining to the petitioner’s land, along with interest for delayed payment; (iii) Direct the respondent authorities to ensure compliance of compensation disbursement and employment benefit within a time-bound period; (iv) Pass such other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice, including costs of this petition.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that land owned by the petitioner was subject matter of acquisition initiated by the respondents along with land of other residents of the area, however, till date the petitioner has not been paid any amount of compensation monetary or any other. The petitioner has approached the authority on several occasions and have also submitted representations, lastly on 23.01.2026 even that representation has not been considered, however, none of the petitioner’s representation was considered nor any compensation has been paid, therefore, direction be issued to the respondents to consider and take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner within specified time frame. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in view of limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner seeking direction to the respondent authorities to take decision on pending representation, he is having no objection. He further submits that in the event the petitioner submits representation before the concerned authority, it will be considered and decided in accordance with law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for respective parties and perused the documents enclosed along with this writ petition. 5. On due consideration of submission made by counsel for respective parties and limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner for taking 3 decision on pending representation/claim of the petitioner before the concerned authorities, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing the respondents to take decision on pending representation/claim of the petitioner in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. 6. The petitioner will be at liberty to submit a fresh representation before the concerned authority along with a copy of this order and in the event the petitioner submits a fresh representation, concerned authority shall take decision on that representation along with pending representations. 7. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of. 8. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Bini