1 2026:CGHC:22781 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2456 of 2026 Anupa Bai Fare W/o Late Rajendra Kumar Fare Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Post Nargoda, Ward No. 02, Suryavanshi Mohalla, Tehsil Sipat, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Manage- ment And Disaster Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Assistant Commissioner Tribal Development Department Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Chandrasen Chouhan, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Anand Dadariya, Dy. A.G. Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 14.05.2026 1 By filing the present writ petition, the petitioner calls in question the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in not grantng compensation of Rs.8,25,000/- under the provisions of YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.05.15 17:27:09 +0530 2 the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atroc- ities) Act, 1989 and the Rules framed thereunder, despite the al- leged murder of the husband of the petitioner namely Rajendra Kumar Fare and registration of offence under Sections 302 and 34 IPC against the accused persons, and seeks a direction to the respondents to release the admissible compensation in accor- dance with law. The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):- “(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities consider the representation and to pay com- pensation amount of Rs. 8,25,000/- on account of death of the deceased as per circular of the Government, within stipulated time, in the inter- est of justice. (ii) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted, in the interest of justice.” 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of petitioner namely Rajendra Kumar Fare was allegedly murdered by accused persons Vikash @ Bhole Kewant and Shani @ Chhotu Gandharv, pursuant to which Marg No.23/2025 was registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Bilaspur and during investigation offence under Sections 302 and 34 IPC has been registered against the accused persons. He would further submit that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste community and is entitled for compensation of Rs.8,25,000/- under Clause 45 of the 3 Schedule appended to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the Rules/Guidelines issued thereunder. It is submitted that despite submission of several representations before the competent authorities, the claim of the petitioner has not been considered till date. He, therefore, prays for a limited direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. 3 Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner seeking consideration of the pending representation, the respondents have no objection if the same is directed to be decided in accordance with law. 4 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and particularly considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, without commenting anything on the merits of the claim of the petitioner, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition directing respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide the pending representation(s) of the petitioner seeking grant of compensation under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the 4 Rules framed thereunder, strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 6 It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 7 With the aforesaid direction, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. 8 There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh