Yashoda Bai Alias Ashoda Bai Vs Union Of India

... Respondents For Petitioner : None. For State : Mr. Kishan Lal Sahu, Dy. Govt. Advocate. For Res. No. 6 to 9 : Mr. Nilkanth Malaviya, Advocate.

¶25

ARUN KUMAR DEWANGAN

¶26

Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR DEWANGAN Date: 2025.07.28 16:51:27 +0530

¶27

Page 2 of 4

¶28

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

¶29

Order on Board

¶30

07/07/2025

¶31

The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of direction to respondent No. 4 i.e. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue)/ Sub Land Acquisition Officer, Kharsiya, DistrictRaigarh for apportionment of compensation of land which has been acquired for construction of rail corridor admeasuring 2.469 hectare situated at Village- Madanpur, Tahsil- Kharsiya, District- Raigarh between the petitioners and respondents No. 6 to 9 as they are family members and the land belongs to them.

¶32

From perusal of record, it is evident that an award was passed by respondent No. on 04.09.2015 under the Railway Act, 1989 (for short “the Act, 1989”) granting compensation of the land which has been acquired for rail corridor. But a dispute of apportionment of the compensation between family members of the petitioner & respondents No. 6 to 9 arises, therefore, this petition has been filed for issuance of direction.

¶33

The said land has been acquired under the provisions of the Act, 1989 which provides complete mechanism for passing award under Section 20 of the Act, 1989 and apportionment of award amount between the family members. Section 2H of the Act, 1989 provides for deposit of payment of amount and Section 20H(4) of the Act provides for jurisdiction within whose limit the land is situated. Section 20N of the Act, 1989 provides for the Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1894 not to apply and mentioned that nothing in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 shall

¶34

Page 3 of 4

¶35

apply to an acquisition under this Act. Section 20H(4) & 20N of the Act, 1989 are as under:-

¶36

“ Section 20H (4)- If any dispute arises as to the apportionment of the amount or any part thereof or to any person to whom the same or any part thereof is payable, the competent authority shall refer the dispute to the decision of the principal civil court of original jurisdiction within the limits of whose jurisdiction the land is situated.

¶37

20N. Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1894 not to apply. —Nothing in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 shall apply to an acquisition under this Act.”

¶38

From perusal of provisions of the Act, 1989, the petitioner has remedy to raise dispute before the competent authority and from records, it is evident that the petitioner has already taken objection on 14.07.2016 and this petition has been filed by the petitioner on 20.08.2016 wherein the petitioner has prayed for apportionment of the award amount of the land in question which is joint family property. The objection raised by the petitioner has been decided by the Land Acquisition Officer wherein it has been mentioned that as per the revenue record, the land is recorded in the name Pitar Bhan, Tijram, Babulal, Hiraram & Pancharam by caste Chandranahu total Khasra No. 6 area admeasuring 2.469 Hectare. Thus, the entitlement of the claim of the petitioners is a disputed question of facts which can be adjudicated by the Competent jurisdictional Civil Court as per Section 20H(4) of the Act, 1989.

¶39

In view of the above, the instant writ petition is not maintainable before this Court at this stage. Since, the petitioner has already raised dispute before the Land Acquisition Officer/respondent No. 4, therefore, the Land Acquisition Officer is directed to refer matter to the concerned Civil Court having jurisdiction for adjudication as per Section 20H(4) of

¶40

Page 4 of 4

¶41

the Act, 1989 who in turn will decide the matter in accordance with law expeditiously on the basis of pleadings, evidence & material placed on record.

¶42

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant writ petition stands dispose of.

¶43

Sd/(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

¶44

Arun

Yashoda Bai Alias Ashoda Bai v. Union Of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yashoda Bai Alias Ashoda Bai v. Union Of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Payarelal Kurre Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ashok Kumar Pandey Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Barkat Ali Farishta Vs Smt.vijay Laxmi Sharma And Ors.

Daulatram Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Nagendra Chaudhary Vs Nagar Palika Parishad Dallirajhara

Kanhai Vs Loknath and Ors.