Chattisgarh High Court
Sheikh Istiyaque vs The Union Of India on 9 August, 2021
1
WPPIL No. 89 of 2021
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPPIL No. 89 of 2021
Sheikh Istiyaque S/o Abdul Rehman Aged About 57 Years
R/o Purani Basti, Katghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. The Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of
Road, New Delhi.
2. National Highway Authority Of India ( NHAI) Through Its
Chairman, NHAI Headquarter, G5 And 6, Sector-10,
Dwaraka New Delhi-110075
3. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, General
Administration Department, Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan,
Capital Complex, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur.
4. Collector District Korba
5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Korba
---- Respondents
For Petitioner :- Mr. B.P. Sharma, Advocate
For Respondent-UOI :- Mr. Ramakant Mishra, ASG
For Respondent-State :- Mr. Satish Chandra Verma, Adv.
General assisted by Mr. V.R. Tiwari, Addl.A.G. with Mr. Sameer
Sharma, Dy.G.A.
Proceedings through Video Conferencing
Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ag.CJ
Hon'ble Shri N.K.Chandravanshi, J.
Order On Board
By
Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ag.CJ
WPPIL No. 89 of 2021
09/08/2021
1. This PIL would pray for a direction to the respondent
Authorities for adoption of one yardstick for determination of
compensation in case of Project Director Vs. Smt. Laxmi
Narayan & Ors. in land acquisition case No. 31/A/82 year
2018-19 by award dated 15.7.2019 by SDO (Revenue)
-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Katghora.
2. Admittedly, an award has been passed by the Land
Acquisition Officer on the requisition made by the NHAI
(National Highways Authority of India) as the said
authority was in requirement of land for widening/ four-laning
of road between Patrapali to Katghora, a part of the
Bharatmala Pariyojna. It is argued that in the subject
acquisition and consequent award, different yardstick has
been applied for determination of compensation for the land
situated at the village area and that situated at the Katghora
town.
3. In our considered view, the award has been passed in
favour of the land owners who are identifiable set of
persons. The PIL is not for benefit of any such class of
persons whose identity is not known and the beneficiary
would be large in number, thousands and lakhs. Moreover,
the acquisition has been made under the provisions of
National Highway Act, 1956 (for brevity 'the Act, 1956')
WPPIL No. 89 of 2021
which is a self-contained code for determination of
compensation with remedies available to the person who is
not satisfied with the quantum of compensation determined
in his favour. An agrieved person can prefer an application
under Section 3G (5) of the Act, 1956 to seek higher
compensation which would be determined by an Arbitrator
appointed under the Act, 1956.
4. Considering that the land holders have a statutory remedy to
espouse their cause and redress their greivances as also for
the reason that the land owners are identifiable class of
persons, this PIL is not maintainable.
5. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to
the order passed by this Court in WA No.7/2019 in the
matter of Ashutosh Agrawal Vs. Union of India decided
on 06.12.2019 to substantiate his plea that the
compensation has been determined in an arbitrary manner.
The judgment may be relied upon by the person who
proceed to invoke remedy available to them under the Act,
1956. In this PIL we are not examining merits of the matter.
6. For the foregoing, the WPPIL stands dismissed.
SD/- SD/-
(Prashant Kumar Mishra) (N.K. Chandravanshi)
Acting Chief Justice Judge
Ayushi
