##PAGE1##

1

Digitally

signed by

ALLENA

ALLENA ANNAJEE

ANNAJEE RAO

RAO Date:

2026.05.14

11:17:16

+0530

2026:CGHC:22497

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPC No. 1894 of 2021

Jagannath Agrawal S/o Rampratap @ Bhagwan Das (Wrongly

Mentioned As Ramprasad In The Mentioned Chart) Aged About 67

Years R/o Katghora Tehsil Katghora District Korba Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioner

versus

1 - Union of India Through Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and

Highways Transport Bhawan 1, Parliament Street New Delhi., District

: New Delhi, Delhi.

2 - Project Director National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) Project

Implementation Unit D - 61, HIG - 1 Abhilasha Parisar Behind New

Bus Stand Tifra Bilaspur District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

3 - State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Department of Revenue

Mahanadi Bhawan Raipur District Raipur District : Raipur,

Chhattisgarh.

4. Collector Korba District Korba Chhattisgarh.

5 - Sub Divisional Officer Cum Competent Authority Land Acquisition

Katghora District Korba Chhattisgarh.

6 - Inspector General Registration and Superintendent of Stamp Gst

Bhawan Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur,

Chhattisgarh ... Respondents

For the petitioner : Mr. Rahul Ambast, Advocate

For Respondent no.2 : Mr. Dheeraj Wankhede, Advocate

For the State/R-3 to Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Advocate

R-6

2

SB: Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

Order on Board

13.05.2026

1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India challenging the award of competent authority

(Land-Acquisition)-cum-SDO (Revenue) dated 15.07.2019 passed in

Land Acquisition Case No. 30/A-82 Year 2018-2019 by which

compensation has been determined for acquiring the land of the

petitioner against which, this writ petition has been filed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that compensation

was not properly calculated by the Land Acquisition Officer and the

action of the Land Acquisition Officer is discriminatory. He submits

that the alternative remedy available under section 3G(5) of the

National Highways Act, 1956 is not a bar to approach this court by

way this writ petition.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for appearing respondent no.2

(NHAI) would submit that the proper remedy available to the

petitioner is to file an application for arbitration under section 3G(5)

of the National Highways Act.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also

perused the material available on record.

5. The language employed in section 3G(5) would show that if

compensation determined by the competent authority under sub-

sections (1) or (2)] is unacceptable to either party, the amount shall

on an application be determined by the arbitrator to be appointed by

the Central Government.

3

6. Since the Commissioner of Bilaspur is the competent authority

to act as an Arbitrator for determining proper compensation, the

petitioner is at liberty to approach the Arbitrator by filing application

in accordance with law within 2 weeks from today. On such an

application being filed, the arbitrator after hearing parties shall pass

the appropriate award within a period of 60 days from the date of

receipt of the application of petition.

7. With the above observation/direction, this writ petition stands

disposed off.

Sd/-

(Sanjay K.Agrawal)

Judge

Rao