1 CGHC010331242026 2026:CGHC:40727 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4509 of 2026 Laxmin Bai W/o Bharat Singh Aged About 67 Years Caste- Schedule Tribe R/o Village Belsari Tehsil Takhatpur District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - Union Of India Through Secretary, Ministry Of Road, Transport And Highways Transport Bhawan Sansad Marg Area New Delhi, District New Delhi 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Chief Engineer Public Work Department National Highway Region Raipur District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Collector Bilaspur District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Kota District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Hariom Rai, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSGI For Respondents No.2 to 5 : Dr. Arham Siddiqui, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 18.09.2026 1. By filing the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent to decide the representation within time frame of 2 months in YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.09.18 17:03:35 +0530 2 light of order passed by Hon'ble High Court in WA/7/2019 in accordance with law. (ANNEXURE P/1). 10.2 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the land owned by the petitioner bearing Khasra No. 768/2, admeasuring 0.168 hectare, situated at Village Belsari, Tehsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.), was acquired for construction of Takhatpur Bypass under National Highway-130A. An award was passed on 25.05.2025 in Land Acquisition Case No. 23/A-82/2022-23. According to the petitioner, the compensation has not been properly determined and certain land losers having smaller areas of land have been awarded higher compensation. The petitioner, therefore, submitted a representation/application under Section 33 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short “the Act of 2013”) before the competent authority for recalculation/recomputation of the compensation in light of the order passed by this Court in W.A. No. 7/2019 dated 06.12.2019. The said representation dated 17.11.2025, followed by an application dated 03.12.2025, is stated to be pending consideration. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that a direction may be issued to the competent authority to take a decision on the pending representation expeditiously within a specified time. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents submits that, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the 3 petitioner seeking a direction to the competent authority to take a decision on the pending representation, they have no objection. Learned State counsel further submits that, if the representation of the petitioner is still pending, the same shall be considered and an appropriate order shall be passed in accordance with law. 4. On due consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties, the nature of grievance raised by the petitioner and the fact that the petitioner has submitted a representation/application before the competent authority invoking the provisions of Section 33 of the Act of 2013, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the pending representation/application submitted by the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in accordance with law. 5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 6. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant petition stands disposed of. 7. In view of the above, the defects pointed out by the Registry are overruled. Sd Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh