Smt. Devkunwar vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2026 Latest Caselaw 1126 Chatt

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1126 Chatt
Judgement Date : 30 March, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Smt. Devkunwar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 March, 2026

                                                           1




                                                                            2026:CGHC:14813


                                                                                           NAFR

                                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                                                 WPC No. 17 of 2021

                   Smt. Devkunwar, W/o Shri Balkrishna Pulast, Aged About 55 Years R/o
                   Village - Nawalpur, Post - Kothari, District - Korba Chhattisgarh., District :
                   Korba, Chhattisgarh
                                                                                ... Petitioner(s)


                                                        versus
Digitally signed by RAVVA
UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU




                   1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Public Works Department,

                   Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur,

                   Chhattisgarh

                   2 - The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, National Highway Division,

                   Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

                   3 - The Sub - Divisional Officer (Revenue) / Land Acquisition Officer, Korba,

                   District - Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

                   4 - The National Highway Authority, Through The Project Director, Project

                   Implementation Unit, Bilaspur, Abhilasha Parisar, Behind New Bus Stand,

                   Tifra, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

                   5 - The Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District :

                   Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

                                                                             ---Respondents

(Cause title taken from CIS System) For Petitioner : Mr. Megha Mishra, Advocate on behalf of Mr.

Anil Tripathi, Advocate.

For Respondent No. 4 : Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, Advocate.

For State : Mr. Sangarsh Pandey, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 30.03.2026

1. The petitioner, in this writ petition, has prayed for following reliefs:-

"10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the records pertaining to the case of petitioner.

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby directing the respondent authorities to pass supplementary award by applying the notification dated 09.02.2016 issued by the Central Government as well as order passed by this Hon'ble High Court in W.P. (C) No. 1961/2018 and WP (C) No. 1140/2019.

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to pay interest over the principal amount @ 12% from the date of entitlement to its actual payment.

10.4 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in favour of petitioner, may also be granted.

2. Fact of the case is that on 11.01.2019, the respondent no. 3 has

passed an award for the land acquired for the purposes of

development of National Highway No. 149-B Champa-Korba- Chhuri-

Katghora National Highway. The competent authority while passing the

award had taken into consideration the notification dated 05.07.2018

issued by the State Government and applied the multiplier of one. The

aforesaid notification was meant for the projects which are being

constructed by the State Government where the State Government is

the appropriate authority. The present acquisition was made for the

National Highways and as such the appropriate Government is Central

Government. The Central Government had issued a notification

whereby the multiplication factor has been notified as 'two' for the

acquisition of land in rural areas for the Central Government projects.

Hence this petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the authorities have not

applied proper multiplier while quantifying the compensation. He

submits that similarly, the authorities concerned have applied different

yardsticks for similar nature of properties lying adjacent to each other

and in the process and different rates of compensation have been

given to different owners which is arbitrary, illegal and bad in law.

4. Perusal of the record would show that the properties were acquired in

the present case applying the provisions of the National Highways Act,

1956 (in short "the Act of 1956"). Section 3 G (5) of the Act of 1956

reads as under:-

"3G(5) If the amount determined by the competent

authority under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) is not

acceptable to either of the parties, the amount shall on

the arbitrator to be appointed by the Central

Government."

5. It has been informed that the Additional Commissioner of Bilaspur

Division has been appointed as the authority to act as an Arbitrator for

determining proper compensation. Considering the nature of claim

raised by the petitioner and also the fact that the claim of the petitioner

is one which can be decided only after due verification and scrutiny of

the revenue records and also on physical verification of the actual

acquisition done, this Court is of the opinion that the matter needs to be

dealt with before the Additional Commissioner under the provisions of

Section 3 G (5) of the Act of 1956.

6. Subject to the petitioner approaching the Additional Commissioner, the

Additional Commissioner shall decide the same objectively by passing

a speaking order. The petitioner is directed to raise his dispute before