1 CGHC010319422026 2026:CGHC:37775 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4385 of 2026 Krishna Singh S/o Parmeshwar Singh, Aged About 53 Years R/o House No. 79, Ward No. 14, Keshav Nagar, Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) 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.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS System) For Petitioner : Ms. Neela Gupta, Advocate For Respondents/SECL : Mr. Ritesh Giri, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Vinod Deshmukh Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 24.08.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition with the following reliefs:- “10.1 In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner most respectfully Digitally signed by AMIT PATEL 2 prays that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to: 10.2 Direct Respondent SECL to forthwith release and pay the compensation amount as per Statement-1A pertaining to the petitioner's land, along with interest for delayed payment; 10.3.Direct the Respondent Authorities to ensure compliance of compensation disbursement within a time-bound period; 10.4 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. At the outset, counsel for the petitioner submits that the identical issue has already been adjudicated upon by this Court in the matter of Lalta vs. South Eastern Coalfield Limited passed in WPC No 2401 of 2026 on 13.05.2026. She refers to paras 5 to 9 of the said order and pray for disposal of this Writ Petition in similar terms. 3. Para Nos. 5 to 9 of the said order reads as under:- “5.Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record 6.From the facts of the case, it appears that the land belonging to the petitioner has been acquired by the respondent authorities for mining purposes and that, as per the official compensation statement placed on record, the petitioner’s name is duly reflected in the list of 3 persons entitled to compensation. It further appears that the petitioner has already submitted representations before the competent authorities seeking release of the compensation amount, which are stated to be pending consideration. At the same time, the stand of the respondents reflects that disbursement of compensation is subject to verification of title and compliance of necessary procedural formalities. In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the ends of justice would be served if a direction is issued to the competent authority to consider and decide the representations submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law. 7.Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the respondent authorities shall consider the representations already submitted by the petitioner and decide the same in accordance with law, expeditiously, while specifically taking into consideration the aspect that compensation has already been reflected and calculated in the official statement pertaining to the acquired land . 8.It is further observed that the petitioner shall be 4 at liberty to file a fresh representation along with all relevant documents before the competent authority, if so advised, and in the event such representation is filed, the concerned authorities shall consider and decide the same along with the pending representations, strictly in accordance with law, within a reasonable period. 9.With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/SECL submits that the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is not opposed and accordingly, does not dispute the same. 5. Since the identical issue has already been adjudicated upon by this Court in the matter of Lalta vs. South Eastern Coalfields Limited, passed in W.P.(C) No. 2401 of 2026 on 13.05.2026, the instant writ petition is also disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order, with the observations and directions contained in paras 5 to 9 thereof. SD/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE AMIT PATEL