SHAKUNTALA DEVI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's land has been acquired for Arpa Bhaisajhar Bairaj Project, however, while assessing compensation, multiplier of 1 has been used, whereas, the Division Bench of this Court in WPC No.1649 of 2017 (Smt. Anita Agrawal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and other connected petitions, has has set-aside the Notification dated 4.12.2014, applying multiplier factor of 1 with direction to the State Government to issue fresh Notification indicating the multiplier factors in terms of the guidelines laid down in the statute and the judgment of the Division Bench. Learned counsel would also submit that a similarly placed affected person, respondent No.5-Isak Mohammad has been provided rehabilitation subvention but the same has not been offered to the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner has further claimed a direction to the respondents to provide employment to one of her family members, however, for the present, she is not pressing the said relief, which may be permitted to be raised subsequently.