2026:CGHC:2271 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVP No. 390 of 2025 • Jyoti Kumar Verma S/o Late Shri Rikhi Ram Verma, Aged About 67 Years R/o Village And Post Dewada, Tehsil Patan, District Durg (C.G.)

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - Union Of India Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Road, Transport And Highways, Transport Bhawan 1, Parliament Street, New Delhi

2 - National Highways Authority Of India, Through Its Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, Raipur, Old Montfort School Campus, N.H.-30 Jhanki, Abhanpur, District Raipur (C.G.)

3 - Project Director Old Montfort School Campus N.H. 30 Jhanki Abhanpur District Raipur (C.G.)

4 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

5 - Competent Authority (Land Acquisitioin) -Cum- Sub- Divisional Officer (Revenue), Patan, District Durg (C.G.)

6 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Patan, District Durg (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Petitioner : Mr. Amrito Das, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate.

For Respondent- NHAI : Mr. Dhiraj Wankhede, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Ms. Supriya Upasana, GA.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge

Order on Board

14.01.2026

1. Petitioner has filed this petition seeking review/recall of order dated 22.08.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.3814/2025 (Jyoti Kumar Verma versus Union of India & Ors). Relevant portion of order dated 22.08.2025 reads as under:

“20. In this present case, the prescribed authorities has modified the award to the extent of determination of amount of compensation. As per the provisions of Section 33(1) of the Right To Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the authorities has right to correct only clerical error when determination of value of things or determination of compensation is changed by the concerned authorities and it is not about a mistake in the mechanics of recording or computation (which characterize clerical errors), but a mistake in applying the conceptual rules of accounting, therefore an error of principle is not considered a clerical error. Therefore, the amended award dated 14.05.2025 passed by the concerned authority is bad-in-law, illegal and without jurisdiction and is accordingly set aside.

21. However, the respondent- NHAI and the concerned aggrieved parties are at liberty to raise the objection before the Arbitrator under Section 3G of the National Highway Act, 1956 challenging the award as per rules/regulations/law.

22. As far as the first award is concerned, if the petitioners want to challenge the award, they may file appeal under Section 3G of National Highway Act.

23. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that vide order dated

22.08.2025, this Court has disposed of the writ petition (W.P.(C) No.3814/2025) in favour of the petitioner but could not decided the issue regarding valuation as well as decreasing the market value @ rate of 30% of the land in the impugned amended award dated 14.05.2025 for computation of compensation of the land acquired after lapse of the long period of more than 7 years of earlier original award passed for earlier acquisition of a portion of the same land, for the same purpose, by the same authority, which was computed in much higher rate, therefore, in absence of the same it is creating hurdle in the way of petitioner to get much delayed fair compensation in lieu of land acquired by the respondent- authorities.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent -NHAI contended that the writ petitioner has not filed any application regarding demand of undisputed award before the (CALA) Competent Authority for Land Acquisition and the subjec