Vimla Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Land Acquisition | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

Vimla Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Land Acquisition | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of; petitioner at liberty to move an application for reference of the compensation dispute to the authority having jurisdiction; authorities directed to consider and decide her claim on its own merits without declining it merely on the ground of limitation.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition is maintainable at this stage for grant of adequate/enhanced compensation, given the statutory course of moving the Collector for a reference to the Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. +1 more

Court's answer

Under the Land Acquisition Act, any dispute as to the quantum of compensation lies by way of the landowner applying to the Collector for enhancement, who refers the matter to the Court (recorded by the Court as under Section 18); consequently, the writ petition is not maintainable at this stage.

Ratio / Principle

Since compensation of Rs. 9,63,397/- granted in earlier WPC No. 604/2012 has already been paid to the petitioner, the Court is not required to determine whether the compensation paid was adequate.

Key takeaways

While disposing of the writ petition, the petitioner is left at liberty to move an application before the authority having jurisdiction to refer and decide the lis between the parties.ratio¶24
The authorities are directed to decide the petitioner's grievance on its own merits and shall not decline her claim merely on the ground of limitation.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Land Acquisition — Compensation — Writ maintainability (Chhattisgarh HC, WPC No. 4210 of 2025, decided 05/01/2026, Narendra Kumar Vyas, J.). Petitioner's land with a double-storied furnished house at Kalkapara Ward No. 9, Dongargarh was acquired in 2010 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for road widening; she sought a direction for adequate compensation. Held: (i) compensation of Rs. 9,63,397/- had already been granted in earlier WPC No. 604/2012 (order dated 27.05.2012) and paid, so the adequacy of compensation need not be determined in this writ petition; (ii) any dispute on quantum of compensation must be raised before the Collector for reference to the Court (recorded as under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act), hence the writ petition is not maintainable at this stage. Petition disposed of with liberty to seek such reference; authorities directed to decide the claim on its own merits and not to decline it merely on the ground of limitation.

1

2026:CGHC:444

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPC No. 4210 of 2025

1 - Vimla Agrawal W/o R.P. Agarwal Aged About 70 Years R/o 145 B Rahul Vihar Dayalbagh District Agra Uttar Pradesh

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Urban Administration And Development Mahanadi Bhawan Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Officer Revenue Dongargarh District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

4 - The Municipal Council Dongargarh District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

... Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Qamrul Aziz, Advocate. For State : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, Panel Lawyer. For Resp. No. 4 : Mr. Shikhar Shukla, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

Order on Board

05/01/2026

This petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of direction to the respondent authorities for grant of adequate compensation for petitioner’s land which has been acquired for widening road.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner’s land where double storied well furnished house was constructed situated at Kalkapara Ward No. 9 Dongargarh has been acquired in the year 2010 for widening road as per the old Act i.e. Land Acquisition Act, 1894 but according to the petitioner, no adequate compensation has been given to the petitioner.

On the other hand, learned State counsel would submit that after calculating the loss caused to the petitioner under the prevailing at the relevant time, the compensation has been paid to the petitioner, therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioner and would pray for

ARUN KUMAR DEWANGAN

Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR DEWANGAN Date: 2026.01.05 18:29:27 +0530

2

dismissal of the writ petition.

From the documents placed on record, it is quite vivid that the petitioner’s land was acquired as per the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and according to the Land Acquisition Act, if any dispute arises with regard to the quantum of compensation, the land owner may move an application before the Collector for grant of enhanced compensation who in turn will refer the same to the Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 for determination, therefore, the writ petition at this stage is not maintainable.

From perusal of record, it is quite vivid that the petitioner has filed petition before this Court bearing WPC No. 604/2012 wherein this Court after examining the case of the petitioner has granted compensation to the tune of Rs. 9,63,397/- vide order dated 27.05.2012 which has already been paid to the petitioner. Since the amount of compensation has already been paid to the petitioner, it is not required to determine the fact that the adequate compensation has been paid or not.

In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner is at liberty to move an application for referring the matter having jurisdiction to decide the lis between the parties. The authorities are directed to decide the grievance of the petitioner and will not decline the claim of the petitioner merely on the ground of limitation and will decide the same on its own merits.

Sd/-

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

Arun