Next hearing on the petition 15 is scheduled on Nov. – Photo : iStock Expansion Approximately in the High Court against the arbitrary land-acquisition by the Municipal Corporation for the flyover in Jabalpur. Half a hundred petitions have been filed. Objection has been presented on behalf of the government on the report presented by the arbitrator appointed by the High Court. The High Court bench comprising Chief Justice Ravi Vijay Kumar Malimath and Justice Vishal Mishra was told that the arbitrator has determined the compensation arbitrarily rather than by mutual consent. The next hearing on the petition 15 has been scheduled for November. Please tell that former High Court judge SS Jha, his advocate son KS Jha and former Supreme Court judge PP Navlekar The forcible acquisition of land for the flyover has been challenged in half a dozen petitions filed including former Attorney General A Agarwal. It has been said in the petition that the flyover is being constructed inside the city by the Municipal Corporation. Where the flyover is being lowered in Pt. Lajjashankar Marg. The width of the said road has been fixed more than 03 feet, which is more than the master plan. For this, personal land of the people is being acquired. Apart from this, people’s land is also being forcibly acquired from Damoh Naka to Madan Mahal road. The petition states that notices have been issued by the Municipal Corporation for land acquisition. The notice did not mention how much land is being acquired. On the one hand, the government talks about proceedings in the court under mutual agreement, while on the other hand, there is a continuous effort to forcibly sabotage it. The court had prohibited any kind of sabotage without consent. The Municipal Corporation is just presenting the argument of having land on lease. No reply has been presented regarding compensation. The High Court, while hearing the petition, had issued orders to appoint an arbitrator for mutual settlement. In the report submitted by the arbitrator, it was said that 100 percent compensation should be given for the building. 100% compensation should be given for leased land 80 and freehold land. The government raised the above arguments expressing objection to the report of the arbitrator. It was told by the government that the road has been determined according to the revenue records. Advocate Aditya Sanghi and Advocate Anshuman Singh appeared on behalf of the petitioners. ,