Sammelal vs. Union Of INDIA
Held
The Court held that the issue of inadequate compensation due to the alleged incorrect application of a multiplier and the use of different yardsticks for similar properties requires individual adjudication. The Court noted that Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956, provides for the determination of compensation by an arbitrator if the amount determined by the competent authority is not acceptable to either party. Since the Additional Commissioner of Bilaspur Division has been appointed as the Arbitrator, the Court directed the petitioners to raise their individual disputes before this authority. The Arbitrator is to decide the matter objectively by passing a speaking order. The petitioners are to approach the Arbitrator within two weeks, and the Arbitrator is expected to decide within 60 days of receiving the applications.
Facts
The petitioners, a group of 14 individuals, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur. They are aggrieved by the compensation awarded for the acquisition of their properties for the construction of National Highway No. 200 (new 49). The petitioners contend that the authorities failed to apply the proper multiplier while quantifying the compensation. Furthermore, they allege that different yardsticks were applied to similar adjacent properties, resulting in arbitrary and varied compensation rates for different owners. The properties were acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956.
Key Issues
1. Whether the compensation awarded for the acquisition of the petitioners' properties is inadequate due to the incorrect application of a multiplier, and if so, what is the appropriate relief? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956). Petitioner's contention: The authorities have not applied the proper multiplier while quantifying the compensation. They have also applied different yardsticks for similar adjacent properties, leading to arbitrary and varied compensation rates. Revenue/State's contention: Not recorded in the judgment. The ASG informed the court that the Additional Commissioner of Bilaspur Division has been appointed as an Arbitrator to determine proper compensation.
Sections Cited
Section 3G(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 954 of 2021
Sammelal S/o Late Hukum Singh Aged About 59 Years R/o Village Borada Tehsil Sakti District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.
Radhelal S/o Shivnath Aged About 69 Years R/o Village Borada Tehsil Sakti District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.,
Yashwant Singh S/o Late Ramhaiya Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Borada Tehsil Sakti District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.
Gajadhar Singh S/o Puran Singh Aged About 57 Years R/o Village Borada Tehsil Sakti District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.
Sovind Ram Sidar S/o Late Kudul Singh Aged About 64 Years R/o Village Borada Tehsil Sakti District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh
Chote Bai Sidar W/o Samundar Lal, Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Borada Tehsil Sakti District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.
Teras Singh Gond S/o Kanhaiya Lal Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Borada Tehsil Sakti District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.
Chhatra Karan Singh S/o Bhaku Lal Aged About 59 Years R/o Village Borada Tehsil Sakti District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.
Satish Kumar Gond S/o Late Pirthi Ram Gond Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Bor
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Chhattisgarh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.