Collector Must Decide Compensation Grievance After Considering the Entire Record and Hearing Petitioners

The petitioners challenged a report submitted by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Tehsil Hata, District Damoh, contending that it inaccurately described the status of the land and might prejudice their compensation claim.

In an earlier proceeding, W.P. No. 3370 of 2023, the High Court had directed the Collector to decide the petitioners’ grievance concerning compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013; that decision remained pending.

The State submitted that a hospital had been constructed and was operating on the land, and that the petitioners’ application for interim injunction in a civil suit had been rejected.

An interim order dated 26 June 2023 in the present petition restrained the Collector from deciding the compensation matter.

1. Whether the Court should adjudicate the petitioners’ challenge to the Sub-Divisional Officer’s report or direct the Collector to decide the underlying compensation grievance in accordance with the earlier order.

2. Whether the Collector’s decision should be made after considering the entire record and providing the petitioners an opportunity to be heard.

The Court relied on its earlier direction in W.P. No. 3370 of 2023 requiring the Collector to decide the petitioners’ compensation grievance.

It also required the Collector to consider the entire record, including the petitioners’ position, and to afford them an opportunity of hearing before making a final decision.

The order does not lay down a substantive rule under the 2013 Act or the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code; the provisions of those enactments were referred to in the petitioners’ requested relief and compensation claim.

The Court found that subordinate revenue authorities had submitted reports and that the Collector had yet to assess the material and make the decision required by the earlier order.

It therefore did not determine whether the challenged report was inaccurate or decide the merits of the compensation claim.

Instead, it directed the Collector to consider the entire record, hear the petitioners, and decide the grievance expeditiously, while permitting the petitioners to object to the Sub-Divisional Officer’s report.

The petitioners were directed to appear before the Collector on 5 October 2026 and could submit their position and objections to the report.

The Collector was directed to decide the matter in terms of the order dated 13 February 2023 in W.P. No. 3370 of 2023, after hearing the petitioners, within 60 days from their appearance.