Disposed

Smt. Kejabai and Ors. v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC6 Oct 2015WA/223/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge High Court of Chhattisgarh held that authorities must provide a breakup of compensation payments within eight weeks if appellants file an application as does Para 12 of Amarjit Singh case, pending any further action. Orders disposed on 6/10/2015

What did the court decide?

Appellants to file application for breakup details; authorities to furnish within eight weeks.

Smt. Kejabai and Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Chhattisgarh HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Writ Appeal No. 223 of 2014

¶5

Smt. Kejabai W/o Shri Muku Sahu Aged About 80 Years R/o Village Sondongri, Po Tendua, Distt Raigarh, Cg

¶6

Baratia S/o Muku Sahu Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Sondongri, Po Tendua, Distt Raigarh, Cg

¶7

Sukhchand S/o Muku Sahu Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Sondongri, Po Tendua, Distt Raigarh, Cg

¶8

Roopchand S/o Muku Sahu Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Sondongri, Po Tendua, Distt Raigarh, Cg

¶9

Ashwini S/o Chaitram Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Sondongri, Po Tendua, Distt Raigarh, Cg

¶10

---- Appellants

¶11

Versus

¶12

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Dks Bhawan, Raipur, Distt Raipur, Cg

¶13

The Collector, Raipur, Distt Raipur, Cg

¶14

The Chhattisgarh Housing Board Having Its Office At Shankar Nagr, Raipur, Dist Raipur, Cg

¶15

The Executive Engineer, Chhattisgarh Housing Board, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Distt Raipur, Cg

¶16

------Respondents

¶17

For Appellants: Shri P.R. Patankar, Advocate. For State/Respondents No.1 & 2: Shri UNS. Deo, Government Advocate For Respondents No.3 & 4: Shri Sanjay Patel, Advocate.

¶18

Hon'ble The Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Judgment on Board

¶19

Per Navin Sinha, Chief Justice

¶20

6/10/2015

¶21

During the pendency of the appeal, a sum of Rs.98 lacs and odd is acknowledged to have been paid to the Appellants for the acquisition of their lands.

¶22

¶23

Learned Counsel for the Appellants submits that appropriate interest has not been paid as discussed in paragraph -12 of (2011) 4 Supreme Court Cases 734 (State of Punjab vs. Amarjit Singh and Another). The affidavit filed by the State is vague and does not furnish the break-up of the calculations made by the authorities with regard to the payment of compensation, solatium interest etc.

¶24

Learned Counsel for the State submits that all legitimate dues payable in accordance with law have been paid.

¶25

We are not inclined to keep this appeal pending any longer and dispose it with the observation that if the Appellants file an application before the authority concerned along with a copy of the present order seeking breakup of the details of the payments made, the authorities are obliged to furnish it to them within the stipulated period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of such application and the information furnished to the Appellants must be in accordance with the discussion contained in para-12 of Amarjeet Singh (supra).

¶26

If the Appellants have any surviving grievances, they may pursue the same in accordance with law.

¶27

Priya

Smt. Kejabai and Ors. v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kejabai and Ors. v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Praveen Khandelwal Vs Bar Council of India and Anr.

State Of Chhattisgarh Vs Rampratap Sahu

M/s. Vinay Kumar Upadhyay Vs South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Vimal Kedia Vs Gopal Rai Soni Anors

Ku. Savi Shukla Vs Union Of India

State Of Chhattisgarh Vs Girwar Prasad Sharma