Allowed

Dipak Kumar Pal v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC4 Feb 2019WP(C)/1204/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposes of a writ petition wherein the petitioner, a legal heir of a displaced landowner, sought compensation and land allocation for a minor irrigation project. The Court directed the Collector to allot an identified patch of land to the petitioner within eight weeks, noting similar cases had granted such relief.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Collector to allot the identified patch of land to the petitioner within eight weeks.

Dipak Kumar Pal Vs State of Orissa — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2019)

¶1

W.P.(C) No. 1204 of 2018

¶2

04.02.2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶3

learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State.

¶4

Petitioner in this writ petition seeks for a direction to opposite party No.2-Collector, Angul to consider and dispose of him claim petition to determine the total compensation amount and to release the amount as per his share within a stipulated time.

¶5

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one Manikyapara Devi Rajmata of Pallahara Ex-State was the owner and in possession of some landed property. The Government of Orissa had taken over Ac.15.62 of land from her w.e.f. 1.7.1952 through Regd. Transfer Deed for construction of Saliamunda Minor Irrigation Project at Pallahara. He further submits that even though a decision was taken by the authority to give land to the petitioner who is successor of land holder in the nearby area, due to nonavailability of land in the vicinity land was not given to him. Thus the present writ petition was filed.

¶7

Learned Addl. Government Advocate submitted that similar matters i.e. W.P.(C) Nos. 13772 & 9710 of 2017 were already disposed of by this Court on 16.1.2019. The present petitioner is one of legal heir. In the aforesaid writ petitions a counter affidavit filed by opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 stating that land was not available earlier for which it was not possible to hand over the same to the petitioners. However in the meantime on re-enquired a suitable patch of Ac.31.24 of similar description in the Villagae Ranjana under Batisuan R.I. Circle of Pallahara Tahasil was identified and

¶8

¶9

the same will be disbursed to the petitioners as decided by the State Government earlier.

¶10

In view of such stand taken by the opposite parties, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction to opposite parties to complete the exercise and allot the land which is identified within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of the order.

¶11

……………… S. Panda, J

¶12

…..……………… S.K.Sahoo, J

Dipak Kumar Pal v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dipak Kumar Pal v. State of Orissa

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

Satyanarayan Agrawal Vs State of Orissa

Basanti Sahoo Vs State of Orissa

B.Tejovati Vs State of Orissa

Rajeswar Rao Naidu Vs State

Deepak Gupta Vs Rdc,Sambalpur

Sujata Pattanaik Vs Branch Manager,Indus-Ind Bank Ltd.