Chhattisgarh High CourtProperty and Real Estate LawAdministrative and Public Law

Rival Claims To Compensation For Bilaspur-Ugra Highway Land: Chhattisgarh HC Gives Collector 45 Days From Order Receipt To Decide Section 64 Application

JAGANNATHv.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Rival Claims To Compensation For Bilaspur-Ugra Highway Land: Chhattisgarh HC Gives Collector 45 Days From Order Receipt To Decide Section 64 Application. JAGANNATH vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH. Chhattisgarh High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether the Collector should be directed to decide respondent No. 6’s pending application under Section 64 of the 2013 Act.

The court held

The Court disposed of the petition and directed the Collector, Janjgir, to decide respondent No. 6’s Section 64 application expeditiously, within 45 days of receiving a copy of the order.

It also directed

The Court clarified that its order expressed no opinion on the merits and that the Collector must decide the application on its own merits and in accordance with law.

01Facts

The petitioners and private respondents Nos. 6 and 7 disputed entitlement to compensation for land bearing Khasra No. 792/2k, acquired for construction of the Bilaspur–Ugra highway.

¶ 1

In an earlier proceeding, WPC No. 3158 of 2022, the Court had permitted respondents Nos. 6 and 7 to apply to the Collector under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and directed the Collector to decide the application.

¶ 2–3

Respondent No. 6 subsequently applied under Section 64; the petitioners filed a reply and representation dated 19 March 2025, but the application remained undecided.

¶ 4

The petitioners therefore sought a direction requiring the Collector to decide it.

¶ 1, 4

02Issues

i.1. Whether the Collector should be directed to decide respondent No. 6’s pending application under Section 64 of the 2013 Act.

¶ 4–6

ii.2. Whether the Court should express any view on the parties’ competing claims to compensation while issuing that direction.

¶ 7

03Law Applied

Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 was the statutory basis of respondent No. 6’s application.

¶ 1, 4

The Court’s direction required the Collector to decide the application expeditiously and in accordance with law; it did not determine the merits of the compensation dispute.

¶ 6–7

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Section 64

04Reasoning

The Court noted that the application had been pending since the earlier proceedings and that the present petition sought only a direction for its disposal.

¶ 6

In view of the State’s submission that the application would be decided if still pending, the Court directed the Collector to determine it within a fixed period. It expressly left the entitlement dispute and merits of the application for the Collector to decide independently, in accordance with law.

¶ 5–7

05Holding

The Court disposed of the petition and directed the Collector, Janjgir, to decide respondent No. 6’s Section 64 application expeditiously, within 45 days of receiving a copy of the order.

¶ 6

The Court clarified that its order expressed no opinion on the merits and that the Collector must decide the application on its own merits and in accordance with law.

¶ 7
Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

JAGANNATHvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High Court · November 04, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment