1 2026:CGHC:18054 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3861 of 2021 1 - Lakhan Lal Tiwari S/o Late Shri Chotu Prasad Tiwari Aged About 76 Years R/o Village Achhola, Police Station Tumgaon, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh, At Present Residing , At New Jwalamukhi Colony, Ward No. 11, Thana Umariya, District Umariya Madhya Pradesh., District : Umaria *, Madhya Pradesh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Public Works Department , Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector (Land Acquisition) Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) And Land Acquisition Officer Mahasamund District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 4 - Executive Engineer Mahanadi Reservoir Project, Division Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from CIS System) For Petitioner : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Advocate For State : Mr. Arpit Agrawal, Panel Lawyer Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 21/04/2026 1. It is submitted that the petitioner is the owner of land which has been acquired for the Samoda Barrage Project undertaken by the respondents. Compensation was determined vide order dated 06.01.2017. The petitioner is aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded and has, therefore, filed the present petition. 2. Learned State counsel opposes the submissions and contends that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy of seeking a reference under Section 64(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2013”). 3. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this petition is disposed of at the motion stage, granting liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate reference application under Section 64(2) of the Act of 2013, along with an application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The respondents are directed to consider the 3 said reference/representation, as well as the application for condonation of delay, and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law expeditiously. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Shayna Judge