Hira Lal Nayak vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2982 Chatt

                                        Page 1 of 2

                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                        Order Sheet
                                   WPCR No. 674 of 2019
                   Siyaram Kurre Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others
    WPC No. 3355 of 2019, WPCR No. 751 of 2019, WPCR No. 828 of 2019,

   WPCR No 979 of 2019, WPCR No. 1031 of 2019, WPCR No. 1037 of 2019 &

                                   WPCR No. 1096 of 2019




29.10.2021         Mr. Krishnan Venugopal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Amit Verma, Ms.
             Swati Sood, Mr. Kaushik Mishra, Mr. Anurag Dayal Shrivastava, Mr. Arvind
             Shrivastava, Mr. K. Rohan, Mr. Siddharth Shukla, counsel for the
             respective petitioners.
                   Mr. Devendra Pratap Singh, Dy. A.G. with Mr. Sudeep Verma, Dy.
             G.A. for the State.
                   Mr. Ramakant Mishra, A.S.G. for the Union of India.
                   Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vaibhav Shukla, Ms. Deepika
             Kalia, Ms. Astha Shukla & Mr. Chandradeep Prasad, counsel for Bastar
             Railway Pvt. Limited.
                   Mr. Vaibhav Dhar Diwan, Advocate on behalf of Mr. P.R. Patankar,
             Mr. Manoj Mishra, Mr. Ankit Singhal, Mr. Yash Agrawal & Mr. Ankur
             Agrawal, counsel for the respective respondents.

Heard I.A. No. 06/2021, application for amendment in writ petitoin filed in WPC No. 3355 of 2019.

By way of this amendment application, the petitioner has sought to add relief clause No. (v) in Para 10 after relief clause (iv) to set aside the award dated 11.07.2019 passed by Commissioner (Annexure P/24 colly).

Learned counsel for respondent No. 7-Mr. Anurag Dayal Shrivastava, Advocate would submit that since the petitioner has already filed an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1965

before the District Magistrate for setting aside the award passed by the Competent Authority as well as by Arbitrator, therefore, the present writ petition is not maintainable, as such, the application is not tenable.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The submission made by learned counsel for respondent No. 7 touches the merits of the case that can be examined while deciding the petition finally as the argument is going on and even the Hon'ble Supreme Court has directed the Court to decide these writ petitions within two months.

Considering this aspect of the matter, the amendment application filed in WPC No. 3355 of 2019 is allowed. The effect of the amendment application will be considered and decided at the time of final judgments.

The petitioner is directed to amend the relief clause and file amended copy of the petition within a week.

All these matters are heard in part.

The State counsel is directed to call for the diary of the cases as well as record of the proceedings initiated in the office of Competent Authority while determining the compensation for perusal of this Court on the next date of hearing.

List all these cases on 16th November, 2021.

Sd/-

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

Amita .