y 1.0-^> /-^ THEHON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) W.P.(C)NO. ^lc,& /09(S.B.) RESOPNDENTS /c^ .^ N ^ ^ ^•' Jhadilal S/o late Badal Yadav, Aged 81 year, R/o Fuljhariapara Tahsil Sarangarh Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through :- The Secretary Revenue Department, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) 'Z. TheCollector Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 3. The Sub Divisional Officer Irrigation Department, Sarangarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 4. The Sub Divisional Officer Public Works Department (P.W.D) Sarangarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ART1CLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA l\v /^^ ^g^ ^y ^-^'^1^?^ .^".:'l:.^-^. f ^! ^^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (0 N0. 5102 OF 2009 PETITIONER RESPONDENT Jhadilal Versus State of Chhattisgarh & others (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Vineet Kumar Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri A.V. Shpdhar, Panel Lawyer for the State/ respondents. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on this 18th day ofJune,2010) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been deprived of his land bearing Khasra No. 160/1, area 0.280 hectare in village Kutela, Patwari Halka No.21, way back in the year 1989. The application of the petitioner for payment of compensation has been pending since long. The petitioner made an application on 24/3/2007 for allotment of alternative land for acquiring the petition scheduled land un-authorisedly and further compensation for loss caused to the petitioner. No order onthe said application was passed till date. 2. Learned counsel appearing for respondents, on the basis of averments made in the return dated 26/2/2010, submits that mistakenly it was earlier believed that the land belonged to the Government. On demarcation, it was found that this was the private land of the petitioner, which had been acquired and further road and portion of sub-canal had been constructed. The respondenV State has decided to calculate the compensation at the market rate and pay — s^ '•'••Es.a.saiP' ashok the same to the petitioner at the earliest, in accordance with the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act, 1894) and pass an appropriate order within a period of 8 weeks from today. \ 3. In view of the foregoing, learne(l counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, nothing survives for adjudication at present in this matter. v 4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. However, if the petitioner remains aggrieved by the amount of compensation, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum as prescribed under the provisions of the Act, 1894 for further enhancement of compensation. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge