Madhya Pradesh High Court
Salagram vs Bhartiya Rashtriya Rajmarg ... on 14 November, 2025
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:33072
1 WP-44331-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
ON THE 14th OF NOVEMBER, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 44331 of 2025
SALAGRAM
Versus
BHARTIYA RASHTRIYA RAJMARG PRADHIKARAN THORUGH
PARIYOJNA NIRDESHAK AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Somesh Gobhuj - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Abhil Lot - Advocate appearing on behalf of Shri Nilesh Agrawal
- Advocate for respondent No.1.
Shri Sudeep Bhargava - Deputy Advocate General for the respondents
/ State.
ORDER
Per: Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla
The petitioner has filed present petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying following reliefs:
"7.1 यह क प टशनर क प टशन स यय वीकार क जाव।
7.2 यह क क प टशनर को ाम झ कर थत भूिम सव न बर 675/2 रकबा
0.442 आरे का ितधन 9,26,432/- पये व उ धनरािश पर 10 ितशत अित र
रािश 3 (जी) (2) के अनुसार 92,643/- पये दलवाई है । इस कार कुल 10,19,075/-
पये दलवाई है । उ रािश पर भू-अजन वधान 1894 क धारा 23 (1A) अित र
रािश व Solatium धारा 23(2) व याज धारा 28 के अंतगत दलवाई जावे।
सव न बर 677/1 रकबा 0.280 आरे का ितधन 5,86,880/- पये व उस पर
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:33072
2 WP-44331-2025
थत वृ का ितधन 18000/- पये दलवाया है इस कार कुल धनरािश
6,04,880/- पये व उ धनरािश व उ धनरािश पर 10 ितशत अित र रािश 3
(जी) (2) के अनुसार 60,488/- पये दलवाई है । इस कार कुल 6,65,368/- पये
दलवाई है । उ रािश पर भू-अजन वधान 1894 क धारा 23 (1A) अित र रािश व
Solatium धारा 23 (2) व याज धारा 28 के अंतगत दलवाई जावे।
7.3 यह क प टशनर को उसक अिध हत भूिम का ितधन िन त समय
अविध म दये जाने बाबत ् आदे श दान कया जावे। "
0 2 . Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the matter is
squarely covered by the judgment passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this
Court on 04/09/2025 in Writ Petition No.35204/2025 (Shivnarayan Vs.
Bhartiya Rastriya Rajya Marg Pradhikaran and Others).
0 3 . Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 does not dispute the
aforesaid fact, however, submitted that against the said order Review
Petition has been filed. He fairly submitted that there is no stay of the said
order by any higher Court.
04. Operative para No.4 and 5 of the order dated 04/09/2025 passed in
the case of Shivnarayan (Supra) are reproduced as under:
"04. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent after going
through the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case.of
Union of India v/s Tarsem Singh (AIRONLINE 2025 SC 94} is
not disputing the aforesaid facts.
05. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is allowed. The claims
i.e. additional compensation under Section 23(1-A), Solatium
under Section 23(2) and interest under Section 28 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 are allowed and the same be paid to the
petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of production
of certified copy of this order."
05. In view of the aforesaid, present petition also stands disposed off
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:33072
3 WP-44331-2025
in light of the directions passed by the co-ordinate Bench vide order dated
04/09/2025. The aforesaid order shall be applicable mutatis mutandis to the
present case also.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Tej
