High Courts

Kewla Singh S/o Nandlal Singh & Ors Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi. & Ors

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 29 May 2026 · Citation: (2026) 05 CHH CK 1506

HON’BLE JUDGES
Narendra Kumar Vyas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Railways Act, 1989 — Section 20F(6)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition All Orders Civil Related To Another Matter No. 2720 Of 2026
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 329 words

Narendra Kumar Vyas, J

1.

By way of this Writ Petition, the petitioners are assailing the award dated 23.02.2026 (Annexure P/5) passed by the Additional Collector & Authorized Officer (Land Acquisition), District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur C.G.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are affected land owners of village Khairbana, District Manendragarh- Chirmiri-Bharatpur, CG. He submits that land of the petitioners were acquired by the respondent authorities for the purposes of Chirmiri Nagpur Halt New Line (17 km) Special Railway Project. He submits that the impugned award was passed by the Respondent No.5, however, appropriate compensation has not been provided to the petitioners. Hence this Petition.

3.

Learned counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 submits that the petitioners are having alternate and efficacious remedy to file an application under Section 20F sub-section (6) of the Railways Act, 1989 before an Arbitrator to be appointed by the Central Government, as such, this Writ Petition is not maintainable. Learned counsel for Respondents Nos.1 to 3 submits that though an Arbitrator has not been appointed as of now, but they have already requested Collector, District Manendragarh Chirmiri Bharatapur for appointment of an Arbitrator vide its memo dated 22.05.2026.

4.

Since the petitioners have alternate and efficacious remedy available to them under Section 20F sub-section (6) of the Railways Act, 1989 to approach before an Arbitrator and considering the submission of counsel for respondent-Union of India that the process of appointment of an Arbitrator has already been initiated, the present Writ Petition, at this juncture, is not maintainable and it is accordingly disposed of granting liberty in favour of the petitioners to approach the Arbitrator within 45 days from the date of appointment of the Arbitrator and in the eventuality of filing an application for enhancement of compensation on being dissatisfied with the quantum of the compensation, the learned Arbitrator shall decide the said application of the petitioners in accordance with law.

5.

With this observation/direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of.