Allowed

Goura Murmu v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC16 May 2016WP(C)/19205/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposed of eight writ petitions concerning land acquisition for the Subarnarekha Irrigation Project. The court held the Land Acquisition Officer must refer petitions for higher compensation to the competent court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. It also directed the Collector to consider resettlement policy applications within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed Land Acquisition Officer to refer applications under Section 18 of LA Act, 1894. Directed Collector to consider resettlement applications within eight weeks.

Goura Murmu Vs State of Odisha — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2016)

¶1

W.P.(C) NOS.19205, 19207, 19208, 19210, 19221, 19223, 19245, 19249 AND 19250 OF 2015

¶2

16.5.2016 As common questions involved in all these Writ Petitions, the matters are taken up for hearing together and are disposed of by this common order.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. Government Advocate.

¶4

The grievance of the petitioners in all these Writ Petitions is that they have filed applications for higher compensation being dissatisfied with the award dated 06.12.2013 passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, Subarnarekha Irrigation Project, Bahalada – opposite party no.3 in L.A Case No.11 of 2012, however, their applications have not been referred to competent court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

¶5

The petitioners contended that their land was acquired for the purpose of Subarnarekha Irrigation Project, Bahalada in the district of Mayurbhanj. Being dissatisfied with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, they have filed applications for higher compensation. However, their applications have not been referred to competent court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The further grievance of the petitioners is that they are entitled to get benefit under Orissa Resettlement and Rehabilitation of Policy, 2006.

¶6

¶7

Considering the limited grievance of the petitioners, without going into the merits of the case, this Court disposes of all these Writ Petitions with a direction to the Land Acquisition Officer, Subarnarekha Irrigation Project, Bahalada – opposite party no.3 to refer the applications filed by the petitioners to the competent court as provided under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as

¶8

¶9

expeditiously as possible. So far as the benefit under Orissa Resettlement and Rehabilitation of Policy, 2006 is concerned, in case the petitioners file applications before the Collector, Mayurbhanj – opposite party no.2 within a period of four weeks from today, in such event, the said opposite party shall consider the same in terms of the aforesaid Policy, 2006, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks thereafter.

¶10

��.. S.Panda, J.

¶11

…………………….. K.R.Mohapatra, J.

Goura Murmu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Goura Murmu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harekrushna Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

A-1 Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd. Vs State of Orissa

Smita Nayak Vs State

Nandi Bag Vs Collector-Cum-Dm,Subarnapur

Jagannath Das Vs Commnr.of Endownemen

M/S.Simplex Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd. Vs State of Odisha