1. By filing the present writ petition, the petitioners have sought a direction to the respondent authorities to determine and pay compensation in respect of their lands situated in different villages of Tehsil Podi Uproda, District Korba, which were acquired for construction of National Highway No.111 (New NH-130), along with all consequential benefits including interest. The petitioners have prayed for following relief(s):-

          "10.1 That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for the entire records from the respondents for its kind perusal.

          10.2 That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to compensate the Petitioners along with interest in respect of his land having been acquired.

          10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioners in respect of the compensation on acquisition of their land and decide the representation of the petitioners within specific time period.

          10.4 That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the state authorities to compensate the Petitioners by paying adequate compensation for the economic and mental harassment.

          10.5 That any other order or orders, direction or directions, writ or writs, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case may also be issued in favour of the Petitioners against the respondents.

          10.6 That costs of the petition may also be awarded to the Petitioners."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the lands belonging to the petitioners were acquired in the year 2015 for construction of the Bilaspur-Ambikapur Section of National Highway No.111 (New NH-130), and the construction of the road was completed in the year 2018. It is submitted that though the acquisition proceedings have attained finality and the petitioners' lands have admittedly been utilized for the public project, no compensation has been determined or paid to them till date. Learned counsel further submits that despite repeated representations made by the petitioners and correspondence exchanged between the authorities, the grievance of the petitioners remained unredressed, compelling them to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. He further submits that respondents No.2, 7 and 8 have filed their return, wherein in paragraphs 6 and 7 it has been specifically stated that the claim of the petitioners is proposed to be redressed by passing a supplementary award in their favour and, therefore, the present petition may be disposed of in terms thereof.

3. On the other hand, learned State counsel, while referring to the return filed on behalf of respondents No.2, 7 and 8, submits that the competent authorities have already initiated the process for redressal of the grievance of the petitioners. It is submitted that although petitioners No.6 and 7, despite being affected by the acquisition and construction of the National Highway, could not be granted compensation earlier, the respondents have taken steps for passing a supplementary award in favour of the eligible petitioners in accordance with the provisions of the National Highways Act and the applicable Rules. He submits that appropriate action shall be taken within the time prescribed under law.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

5. Considering the stand taken by respondents No.2, 7 and 8 in their return, particularly the averments contained in paragraphs 6 and 7, wherein it has been stated that the grievance of the petitioners would be redressed by passing a supplementary award, this Court is of the opinion that no further adjudication is required in the present writ petition.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to take the process to its logical conclusion by passing the supplementary award in favour of the petitioners, if they are found entitled, and to ensure payment of the compensation and other admissible statutory benefits strictly in accordance with law, within the period stipulated under the applicable statute. 7 It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioners, and all questions of fact and law are left open to be considered by the competent authority while passing the supplementary award.

8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.