Authorities must demarcate alleged submergence land and initiate acquisition if affected by the barrage.

The petitioner claimed to be a joint owner of land bearing Khasra No. 980/3 situated at Village Chandrapur, Tahsil Chandrapur, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh.

She alleged that, following construction of the Kalma Bairaj over the Mahanadi River by the Water Resource Department, a portion of her agricultural land had come within the submergence area, but no land-acquisition proceedings had been initiated in respect of that portion.

She sought spot inspection, initiation and conclusion of acquisition proceedings, compensation, interest under Section 80, and the additional amount under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

During hearing, the petitioner restricted her prayer to liberty to submit a fresh representation and consequential directions to the authorities.

The State had no objection to disposal of the petition with appropriate directions, subject to the petitioner first approaching the competent authorities.

Whether the petitioner should be granted liberty to submit a fresh application before the competent authorities regarding alleged submergence of her land due to the Kalma Bairaj.

Whether the respondent authorities should be directed to demarcate the subject land and, if it is found to fall within the submergence or affected area, initiate acquisition proceedings and grant compensation within prescribed timelines.

Whether the petitioner was entitled, at this stage, to interest under Section 80 and the additional amount under Section 30(3) of the 2013 Act.

The Court applied the procedural principle that where a grievance involves factual verification and consideration by the competent administrative authorities, the petitioner may first be directed to submit a proper representation supported by relevant documents.

The Court required the authorities to follow due process of law while conducting demarcation and determining whether the land falls within the submergence or affected area.

Sections 80 and 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 were invoked in the petitioner’s prayers concerning interest and the additional amount, but the Court did not determine the petitioner’s substantive entitlement under those provisions.

The Court did not adjudicate whether the petitioner’s land had in fact been submerged or whether she was legally entitled to acquisition, compensation, interest, or the additional statutory amount.

Since those questions required factual demarcation and consideration by the competent authorities, and the State consented to appropriate directions, the Court adopted a limited, non-merits approach.

It therefore permitted the petitioner to file a fresh application with all necessary documents and directed the authorities first to demarcate the land.

Only if the demarcation established that the land fell within the Bairaj’s submergence or affected area were the authorities required to initiate appropriate compensation proceedings.

The petitioner was granted liberty to file a fresh application before the respondent authorities, along with the necessary documents and a copy of the order, within 15 days from 24 August 2026.

Upon filing, the authorities were directed to complete demarcation within 45 days, following due process of law.

If the land was found to fall within the submergence or affected area of the Kalma Bairaj, appropriate acquisition and compensation proceedings were to be initiated and concluded within a further 90 days from the date of demarcation.