Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Chattisgarh High Court

Vishnu Kumar vs State Of Chhattisgarh 14 Fa/180/2003 ... on 17 September, 2018

Author: Prashant Kumar Mishra

Bench: Prashant Kumar Mishra

                                  1

                                                                NAFR

       HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                       WPC No. 2543 of 2018

    Vishnu Kumar S/o Sitaram Aged About 43 Years R/o Taparda
     Cottage Baikunthpur, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.,

                                                        ---- Petitioner

                               Versus

  1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary , Department Of
     Revenue Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, New Raipur, District
     Raipur, Chhattisgarh

  2. Collector District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

  3. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) And Land Acquisition Officer
     Raigarh District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

  4. Sub Divisional Officer (Irrigation) Belpali Pariyojna Minor Project
     Raigarh District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

                                                      ---- Respondent

For Petitioner Mr. Krishna Gopal Yadav, Advocate For Respondent/State Mr. AS Kachhwaha, Additional Advocate General Order On Board By Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra 17/9/2018

1. Heard.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's land has been acquired for Belpali Canal Project by the Water Resources Department in the year 2012. However, while calculating the amount of compensation, the solatium has not been paid to the petitioner. 2

3. If the petitioner feels dissatisfied with the adequacy of the amount of compensation offered to him, the appropriate course is to move an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

4. The petitioner may move such application, which shall be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.

5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/-

(Prashant Kumar Mishra) Judge Shyna