Disposed

Shri Harnarayan Rathore v. the Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited (Secl)

Chhattisgarh HC19 Mar 2018WPC/738/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged an order rejecting his representation regarding unpaid land acquisition compensation under the Coal Bearing Areas Act, 1957. The High Court, at the final stage, granted the petitioner liberty to file a representation before the Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner is at liberty to make representation under Section 14 of the Act, 1957 before the Tribunal for determination of compensation.

Shri Harnarayan Rathore Vs the Chief General Manager… — Land Acquisition | Chhattisgarh HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Writ Petition (C) No. 738 of 2018

¶5

Shri Harnaranay Rathore, S/o Late Shri Hiraram Rathore, aged about 60 years, R/o Plot No. 295, Transport Nagar, District Korba (C.G.)

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited (SECL) Seepat Road, Post Box No. 60, Bilaspur, District – Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶9

Area Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited (SECL) Sub Area Mnager, Gevra Project, Post Office Gevra, District Korba (C.G.)

¶10

Manager, SECL Gevra Project, Post Office Gevra, District Korba (C.G.)

¶11

The Sub Divisional Officer, Revenue Katghora,District Korba (C.G.)

¶12

The Collector, Korba, District Korba (C.G.)

¶13

---- Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, Advocate. For Respondents/SECL : Mr. Sudhir Bajpai, Advocate. For State : Mr. Avinash Singh, Panel Lawyer.

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

¶16

Order On Board

¶17

19/03/2018

¶18

(1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's land has been acquired by the South Eastern Coalfields Limited under The Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (henceforth 'Act, 1957') and though the compensation has been assessed but it has not been paid to the petitioner. He submits that by the impugned order, pursuant to the order passed by this Court in WPC No.2525 of 2017 decided on 12.09.2017, petitioner's representation has been rejected.

¶19

¶20

(2) Per contra, counsel for the SECL would submit that the Tribunal is constituted under

¶21

the Section 14 of the Act, 1957 for determining the proper compensation.

¶22

(3) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶23

(4) Be that as it may, the petitioner is at liberty to make representation under Section 14

¶24

of the Act, 1957 before the jurisdiction Tribunal for determination of the proper compensation in accordance with law and, in turn, the same is directed to be decided in accordance with law expeditiously.

¶25

(5) With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands finally disposed of.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

( Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

¶28

D/-

Shri Harnarayan Rathore v. the Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited (Secl)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Harnarayan Rathore v. the Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited (Secl)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Siya Ram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ghanshyam Prasad Kashyap Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Kartik Ram Kurre Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Mohammad Naushad Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

M/S Purwasha Vanijiya Privet Ltd. Vs the Collector Mahasamund

Chandrabhan Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.