Mangal stretch never acquired by PWD:

 

 

 

 

Raipur The Mangal-Bhainsajhar Road case, launched as an infrastructure upgrade under the Asian Development Bank (ADB)-assisted Loan-3 Package-18, has become a case study in administrative overlap and legal ambiguity. A seven-point written clarification issued by Bilaspur District Collector Sanjay Agrawal, and availed exclusively to ‘The Hitavada’, reconstructs the entire chain of events with procedural precision and sets out the legal path ahead for the aggrieved residents.

 

The clarification states that on 22 April 2025, the Under Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, wrote to the Collector Bilaspur seeking a factual report ‘with clear opinion’ on petitions from landowners who claimed that, despite consenting in Form ‘A’, they had not received compensation. Copies of these applications were enclosed. Acting on the directive, the Collector sought reports from both the Project Manager,

 

ADB Project (Public Works Department) and the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Bilaspur, to ascertain the ground status. Data received showed that under ADB Loan-3 Project Package-18 for the Mangal–Bhainsajhar road (total length 25.958 km), 24.282 km had been constructed while 1.678 km was left pending. The completed portion covers eight villages under Takhatpur and Kota sub-divisions, affecting 75 landowners - 66 consented for acquisition, 57 registrations completed, and nine landowners of Jogipur village were compensated under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, with awards issued and payments cleared.

 

The remaining 1.678 km Mangla segment, falling under Bilaspur urban limits, was handled by the Revenue office. Here, the SDO (Revenue) prepared a case file and issued Form ‘A’ on 7 September 2022, collecting Form ‘B’ from 99 landowners whose plots were shown as potentially affected. However, due to the high cost of compensation and departmental instructions, construction on this portion was not carried out, and no land was legally acquired. The entire compensation record for Mangla has since been transferred to the Bilaspur Municipal Corporation as the area now falls within urban limits.

 

Agrawal’s report notes that all petitioners listed by the Revenue Department belong to Mangla and that no official possession has been taken, nor has any construction been executed on their lands. It adds that if any applicant believes construction has occurred on their property, they may file a khasra-wise application for demarcation; in such cases, if construction is confirmed, compensation will be processed “as per rule” under the 2013 Act. The clarification differentiates between consent-based acquisition, which relies on mutual agreement and registration, and statutory acquisition, which requires a formal award under law. Since the Mangla stretch never crossed that legal threshold, the Collector concludes that

 

PWD liability has not arisen so far. RTI activist Sukumar Yadav calls for a transparent reconciliation. “If the administration claims no land was taken, let it prove that through demarcation. If land was used, let payment follow under the 2013 Act,” he said, urging a joint survey by PWD, Revenue and Municipal Corporation. The Collector’s clarification thus transfers operational responsibility to the Municipal Corporation, which must now conduct a field-verified status survey to determine whether any portion of the road alignment overlaps private plots. Until that happens, affected families remain caught between sanctioned entries that never became awards and official claims that no acquisition occurred. “Sanction cannot substitute settlement,” said Yadav. “Justice lies either in payment or in proof-not in silence.” The stark reality of the Mangal-Bhainsajhar Road compensation case, now etched as a precedent in administrative law and public accountability, can be summed up in one line: the files are complete, but the closure is not.