HARISH KUMAR JHARIYA vs State of Chhattisgarh
- Court
- Chhattisgarh High Court
1
CGHC010294392020 2026:CGHC:44854
NAFR
Digitally
signed by
PRIYANKA
VERMA
Date:
2026.10.16
18:47:28
+0530
PRIYANKA
VERMA
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 162 of 2021
1 - Harish Kumar Jhariya Son Of Late Shri Babulal Thariya Aged About 42
Years Resident Of Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh
(Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
2 - Tribhuwan Singh Rathiya Son Of Govind Ram Rathiya Aged About 32
Years Resident Of Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh
(Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
3 - Chandrika Prasad Chandra Son Of Piriyalal Chandra Aged About 54 Years
Resident Of Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh
(Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
4 - Pavitra Singh Son Of Gendalal Rathiya Aged About 34 Years Resident Of
Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh),
District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
5 - Ganesh Ram Rathiya Son Of Salikram Aged About 58 Years Resident Of
Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh),
District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
6 - Ganesh Ram Jhariya Son Of Makardwaj Jhariya Aged About 57 Years
Resident Of Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh
(Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
7 - Moti Lal Rathiya Son Of Rai Singh Aged About 45 Years Resident Of
Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh),
District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
8 - Parshuram Son Of Daulatram Aged About 55 Years Resident Of Village
Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh), District :
Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
2
9 - Ganpat Rathiya Son Of Dal Sai Rathiya Aged About 40 Years Resident Of
Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh),
District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
10 - Heera Bai Rathiya Son Of Thanda Ram Rathiya Aged About 60 Years
Resident Of Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh
(Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
11 - Smt. Yashoda Dansena Wife Of Nankiram Dansena Aged About 70 Years
Resident Of Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh
(Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
12 - Smt. Gulapi Bai Wife Of Bhutanglal Aged About 60 Years Resident Of
Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh),
District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
13 - Smt. Sita Jhariya Daughter Of Late Gajadhar Jhariya Aged About 25
Years Resident Of Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh
(Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
14 - Smt. Ramkunwar Wife Of Late Ram Sai Aged About 50 Years Resident
Of Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh),
District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
15 - Maniram Rathiya Son Of Ghasiram Rathiya Aged About 70 Years
Resident Of Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh
(Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
16 - Shuklal Rathiya Son Of Jairam Rathiya Aged About 65 Years Resident Of
Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh),
District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
17 - Digambar Rathiya Son Of Maniram Rathiya Aged About 50 Years
Resident Of Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh
(Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
18 - Chandan Singh Rathiya Son Of Girwar Rathiya Aged About 35 Years
Resident Of Village Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh
(Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
--- Petitioners
versus
3
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Revenue And Revenue
Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur (Chhattisgarh),
District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2 - Collector Raigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh,
Chhattisgarh
3 - Land Acquisition Officer / Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue)
Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh), District : Raigarh,
Chhattisgarh
4 - Godawary Energy Pvt. Ltd. Heera Arked Raipur Through J.P. Tiwari Caste
Bramhan R/o. Ashok Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District :
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
5 - Chief General Manager Godawary Energy Pvt. Ltd. District Vyapar And
Udyog Kendra, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh,
Chhattisgarh
6 - Deputy Chief Engineer South East Central Railway, Raigarh, District
Raigarh Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
--- Respondents
WPC No. 321 of 2022
1 - Munilal Mehar S/o Late Dayaram Aged About 58 Years R/o Village
Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.
2 - Roopchand Mehar S/o Late Dayaram Aged About 60 Years R/o Village
Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.
3 - Shyamnarayan Mehar S/o Late Dayaram Aged About 45 Years R/o Village
Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.
--- Petitioners
Versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Revenue
Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2 - Collector, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.
3 - Land Acquisition Officer/sub Divisinal Officer (Revenue), Dharamjaigarh,
District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.
4
4 - Godawary Energy Pvt. Ltd. Heera Arked Raipur, Through J.P. Tiwari Caste
Bramhan R/o. Ashok Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
5 - Chief General Manager, District Vyapar And Udyog Kendra, Raigarh,
District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.
6 - Deputy Chief Engineer South East Central Railway, Raigharh, District
Raigarh Chhattisgarh.
--- Respondents
For Petitioners : Mr. Ravi Kumar Banjare, Advocate appears
on behalf of Mr. Manoj Kumar Jaiswal,
Advocate
For Respondent No.4 : Mr. Varchasva Agrawal, Advocate appears on
behalf of Mr. K.Rohan, Advocate
For Respondent No.6 : Ms. Shweta Rai, Advocate appears on behalf
of Mr. R.K. Mishra, DSGI for Union of India
For State : Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Deputy GA
Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order on Board
16/10/2026
1. The petitioners, in Writ Petition No.162/2021, have prayed for the
following reliefs:-
“(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to call for the entire record pertaining to the
petitioner's case, in the interest of justice.
(ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to quash impugned order dated 26.07.2019
(Annexure P-1) passed by the land acquisition
officer/ respondent no. 3 in revenue Ma. No.
07/A-82/2019 which is arising out of order/award
dated 16.08.2011 (Annexure P-2) passed by the
land acquisition officer/ respondent no. 3 in land
acquisition case no. 03/A-82/2010-2011 in respect
5
of the petitioners or to provide job in the
respondent department to the petitioners, in the
interest of justice.
(iii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to direct the respondent authorities to make
payment of compensation as per market value and
provide job in accordance with provision of the Act
2013.
(iv) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to commend and direct the respondent authorities
to pay damages, solatium with interest to the
petitioners.
(v) Any other relief which may be suitable in the
facts and circumstances of the case, may also be
granted.”
2. The petitioners, in Writ Petition No.321/2022, have prayed for the
following reliefs:-
“(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to call for the entire record pertaining to the
petitioner's case, in the interest of justice.
(ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to quash impugned order dated 26.07.2019
(Annexure P-1) which is arising out of order/award
dated 16.08.2011 (Annexure P-2), in the interest of
justice.
(iii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to direct the respondent authorities to make
payment of compensation as per market value with
interest and provide job in accordance with
provision of the Act 2013.
(iv) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be to
commend and direct the respondent authorities to
6
pay damages, solatium with interest to the
petitioners.
(v) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to direct the respondent authorities to provide the
rehabilitation in lieu of acquiring land of the
petitioners, in the interest of justice.
(vi) Any other relief which may be suitable in the
facts and circumstances of the case, may also be
granted.”
3. Facts of the case in brief are that the petitioners’ land situated at Village
Chitapali, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.), was acquired
by the respondent authorities in the year 2010 for the purposes of an
industry established by Godawari Energy Pvt. Ltd., and an award was
passed on 16.08.2011, granting compensation to the petitioners. It is
contended that the petitioners continued in possession of the land.
Thereafter, vide order dated 26.07.2019, the land was again acquired for
the East Rail Corridor Special Rail Project from Kharsiya to
Dharamjaigarh and Gharghoda to Dongabhauna, without following the
provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short, “the
Act of 2013”). The petitioners contend that they have not been paid
compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Act of 2013, nor
have they been provided employment benefits, despite repeated
representations to the concerned authorities. Hence, the present petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are
challenging the award dated 16.08.2011. He further submits that the
petitioners and other similarly situated persons have already received the
7
compensation awarded under the said award. However, the petitioners
have filed the present petitions seeking modification of the
compensation awarded on 16.08.2011 and, by quashing the subsequent
order dated 26.07.2019, seek a direction to the respondent authorities to
grant compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Act of
2013.
5. Learned State counsel submits that the acquisition proceedings were
initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the award was
passed on 16.08.2011, prior to the enactment of the Act of 2013. He
further submits that the petitioners have already received the
compensation awarded under the said award and, therefore, they cannot
seek compensation afresh under the Act of 2013.
6. Learned counsel for respondent No. 6/Railways also submits that the
writ petitions are devoid of merit, as the award was passed on
16.08.2011 and the petitioners have already received the compensation
awarded thereunder. He further submits that the petitioners' claim for
compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Act of 2013 is
misconceived and is not sustainable in law.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the
record, it appears that the award in respect of the acquisition of the
petitioners' land was passed on 16.08.2011 under the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894, and the petitioners have already received the compensation
awarded thereunder. The petitioners are seeking compensation in
accordance with the provisions of the Act of 2013 by challenging the
8
subsequent order dated 26.07.2019. However, in view of the fact that the
original award was passed prior to the enactment of the Act of 2013, the
petitioners cannot claim compensation under the Act of 2013 merely on
that ground. Accordingly, no relief, as sought by the petitioners, can be
granted in the present writ petitions.
8. Consequently, both the writ petitions are dismissed
Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Priyanka