Lalta Vs South Eastern Coalfield Limited

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:13079

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 1177 of 2026

¶6

Lalta S/o Mani Ram Aged About 56 Years R/o Village- Pondi, Kekta, DistrictSurajpur (C.G.)

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - South Eastern Coalfield Limited Through - Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, South Eastern Coalfield Limited Head Quarter, Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶10

2 - South Eastern Coalfield Limited Through General Manager Bishrampur Area, District- Surajpur (C.G.)

¶11

3 - Project Office South Eastern Coalfield Limited, Bishrampur Area, DistrictSurajpur (C.G.)

¶12

... Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr. KPS Gandhi, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Vinod Kumar Deshmukh, Advocate

¶14

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

18.3.2026

¶17

1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking following reliefs:-

¶18

“(i) In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner most respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to:

¶19

(ii) Direct respondent SECL to forthwith grant employment benefit as per Statement – 1A pertaining to the petitioner’s land;

¶20

Digitally signed by BINI BINI PRADEEP PRADEEP Date: 2026.03.19 17:50:06 +0530

¶21

2

¶22

(iii) Direct the respondent authorities to ensure compliance of employment benefit within a time-bound period;

¶23

(iv) Pass such other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice, including costs of this petition.”

¶24

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that land owned by the petitioner was subject matter of acquisition initiated by the respondents along with land of other residents of the area, however, till date the petitioner has not been paid any amount of compensation monetary or any other. The petitioner has approached the authority on several occasions and have also submitted representations, lastly on 17.10.2025 even that representation has not been considered, however, none of the petitioner’s representation was considered nor any compensation has been paid, therefore, direction be issued to the respondents to consider and take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner within specified time frame.

¶25

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in view of limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner seeking direction to the respondent authorities to take decision on pending representation, he is having no objection. He further submits that in the event the petitioner submits representation before the concerned authority, it will be considered and decided in accordance with law.

¶26

4. I have heard learned counsel for respective parties and perused the documents enclosed along with this writ petition.

¶27

5. On due consideration of submission made by counsel for respective parties and limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner for taking decision on pending representation/claim of the petitioner before the concerned authorities, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition

¶28

3

¶29

directing the respondents to take decision on pending representation/claim of the petitioner in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order.

¶30

6. The petitioner will be at liberty to submit a fresh representation before the concerned authority along with a copy of this order and in the event that the petitioner submits a fresh representation, the concerned authority shall take decision on that representation along with any pending representations.

¶31

7. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶32

8. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

¶35

Bini

Lalta v. South Eastern Coalfield Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalta v. South Eastern Coalfield Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Ajooba Radhakrishnan Vs Union of India

Devashish Vs South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Smt. Ruhi Agrawal Vs Raipur Development Authority

Ramjan Ali Urf Balla Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Satish Kumar Yadav Vs Sanjeev Kumar Jha

Smt. Reetu Agrawal Vs the State of Chhattisgarh