Right to compensation for road-widening accrues upon factual verification of land utilization without lawful acquisition.

The petitioner, Suresh Kumar Shriwas, is the recorded owner of agricultural land (Khasra No. 38/1) in Village Sukalipali, District Sakti

He alleged that the State authorities utilized a portion of his private land for the widening of the Sakarra–Bhothiya road without formal acquisition or payment of compensation

Despite submitting representations to the authorities, no action was taken, prompting the petitioner to approach the High Court seeking a direction for compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013

1. Whether the respondent authorities utilized the petitioner's private land for road widening without following due process of law and payment of compensation

2. Whether a direction should be issued to the Collector to demarcate the property and initiate acquisition proceedings if the encroachment is confirmed

Article 300A of the Constitution of India, which mandates that no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law

Although the right to property is no longer a fundamental right, it remains a significant constitutional right requiring due process and compensation for any deprivation

The procedural framework for such compensation is governed by the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013

The Court observed that the grievance was essentially a factual dispute concerning whether the road construction overlapped with the petitioner’s specific survey numbers

It reasoned that while the State has the power to develop infrastructure, it cannot bypass the constitutional requirement of Article 300A

The Court determined that a factual verification through "demarcation" by revenue authorities is a prerequisite to establish the extent of land utilization

By directing the Collector to oversee this demarcation with notice to all parties, the Court ensured that the administrative machinery is activated to provide a remedy for the alleged arbitrary state action

It ordered Respondent No. 2 (Collector) to ensure proper demarcation with notice to all concerned parties

if the demarcation confirms the utilization of the petitioner’s land for the road, the State must "take appropriate steps for acquisition" and ensure payment of compensation and admissible benefits according to law

The entire exercise was ordered to be completed within 90 days of receipt of the order. No order as to costs was made