Disposed

Surendranath Singh v. Competent Authority

Orissa HC5 Sept 2017WP(C)/23431/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking release of compensation funds deposited in the name of a Deity for acquired land, the court refrained from expressing an opinion on the merits but granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the Commissioner of Endowments to establish their claim, directing said authority to dispose of the application within three months.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to approach Commissioner of Endowments to establish entitlement; Commissioner directed to dispose of application within 3 months.

This writ petition has been filed praying for a direction to release t he compensation amount received in respect of the acquired land, which has been kept in fixed deposit in the name of the Deity.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the purchaser of the acquired land which initially stood recorded in the name of the Deity which a ccording to the petitioner is a private one. It is submitted that as the petitioner is a subse quent purchaser, neither any permission under section 19 of the OHRE Act nor the no objection under section 19(A) of the OHRE Act is required and further the acquired land has been recorde d in the name of the petitioner in the consolidation proceeding and accordingly, the ROR has b een issued in the name of the petitioner. It is also submitted that merely because the acquire d land at one point of time stood recorded in the name of Sri Nrusinghnath Dev, Bije Nijagruha , the compensation amount received from the National Highway Authority of India has been kept in fixed deposit in the name of the Deity. It is further submitted that as the petitioner is a bonafide purchaser after due enquiry, he is entitled to get the compensation amount in respec t of the acquired land.

Learned counsel for the opp.party no.2-Commissioner of Endowments subm its that the acquired land has been recorded in the name of the Deity, Sri Nrusinghnath Dev, B ije Nijagruha since inception. It is submitted that irrespective of the fact that whether the Deity is a public or private, permission or no objection as the case may be upon consideration of the relevant factors would be necessary from the Commissioner of Endowments before such la nd can be transferred by way of sale or otherwise. It is submitted that in the present case no permission has been obtained by the Marfatdar either for the first transfer or by the said fi rst purchaser for the subsequent transfer in favour of the petitioner for which all these tran sfers are void.

Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion wi th regard to the merit of the contentions, the writ petition is disposed of granting liberty t o the petitioner to approach the opp.party no.2-Commissioner of Endowments, Bhubaneswar, Odish a to establish his claim as to the entitlement to receive the compensation amount under deposi t. In the event such an application is filed, the Commissioner (opp.party no.2) shall do well to dispose of the same, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three mont hs from the date of receipt of such application, affording opportunity of hearing to the parti es concerned.

Surendranath Singh v. Competent Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendranath Singh v. Competent Authority

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

Dinesh Kumar Behera Vs a.O.,Uco Bank

Debendra N.Balabantr Vs Bank of India

Sabita Rani Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Dinabandhu Mishra Vs NHAI

Prabir Dash Vs State of Orissa

Satrughna Bhoi Vs B.M.,Utkal Gramya Bank