Disposed

Uddhaba Bagarti v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC30 Mar 2021WP(C)/14854/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought compensation for land acquired for the Diaton Branch Canal. The High Court disposed of the writ petition, granting liberty to file a representation before the Executive Engineer within 21 days. The officer must then dispose of the matter within three months via a reasoned order.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a comprehensive representation before the Executive Engineer within 21 days; the officer to dispose within three months via a reasoned order.

Uddhaba Bagarti Vs State of Odisha — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(C) No.14854 of 2020

¶2

P R E S E N T :

¶3

SHRI JUSTICE S. K. MISHRA AND MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

¶4

________________________________________________ Uddhaba Bagarti …… Petitioner. - VersusState of Odisha and Others …… Opp. Parties.

¶5

For Petitioner : Mr. B.K. Behera-1 & Mr. P.K. Dash For Opp. Parties : Mr. A.R. Dash, AGA.

¶6

O R D E R

¶7

03. 30.03.2021

¶8

This matter is taken up by Hybrid mode.

¶9

Heard Mr. B.K. Behera-1, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. A.R. Das, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶10

By filing this writ petition, the Petitioner has prayed to direct the Opposite Party Nos.4 and 5 to pay compensation for acquisition of land for the purpose of construction of SubCanal, namely, “Diaton Branch Canal” under Tikhali Dam Project, Tikhali, under Khata Nos.6, 17 and 28, consists of three numbers of plots measuring total area of Ac.1.48 decimals of land in Mouza- Bahalgava, under Bangomunda Tahasil in the district of Bolangir relating to L.A.C. No.03 of 2011 under

¶11

¶12

Annexure-1 series and also to pay the compensation at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of original payment.

¶13

It appears that the Opposite Party No.7-Tahasildar, Bangomunda, District- Bolangir vide letter No.2291 dated 02.11.2017 has written to the Opposite Party No.6- Executive Engineer, Canal Division, Khariar, District- Nuapada regarding transmission of Misc. Petition of the Petitioner for payment of compensation account. The said letter is quoted as follows:

¶14

“TAHASIL OFFICE, BANGOMUNDA

¶15

Letter No.2291/ Dt.02.11.2017

¶16

To,

¶17

The Executive Engineer, Canal Division, Khariar.

¶18

Sub:- Transmission of misc. petition of Sri Uddhaba Bagarty s/o late Ganesh Bagarty of village- Bahalguva for payment of compensation amount.

¶19

Sir,

¶20

I am to forward herewith the misc. petition (in original) received from one Uddhaba Bagarty of village Bahalguva, P.S. Sindhekela, District- Balangir for payment of compensation amount against the plots acquisitioned for Tikhali Dam Project.

¶21

I, therefore, request you to please look into the matter personally for making payment of the compensation amount to Sri Uddhaba Bagarty and other co-sharers of holding Nos.6, 17 and 28 of Mouza- Bahalguva, if found admissible.

¶22

Yours faithfully,

¶23

Sd/Tahasildar, Bangomunda”

¶24

¶25

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that as yet the matter is pending before the Opposite Party No.6Executive Engineer, Canal Division, Khariar, District- Nuapada and no compensation has been paid to the Petitioner.

¶26

In that view of the matter, we dispose of the writ petition giving liberty to the Petitioner to present a comprehensive and properly articulated representation before the Opposite Party No.6- Executive Engineer, Canal Division, Khariar, District- Nuapada within a period of twenty-one working days hence annexing a copy of the brief and a certified copy of this order. On such event, the Opposite Party No.6Executive Engineer, Canal Division, Khariar, District- Nuapada shall consider such representation of the Petitioner giving reasonable opportunity of hearing and production of relevant documents to the Petitioner and the relevant Department i.e. the Canal Division, Khariar, District, Nuapada, if he considers that there is no necessity of hearing of any other persons related to the Petitioner Uddaba Bagarti or any co-sharers and dispose of the same within a period of three months from the date of production/ receipt of the representation along with a copy of the brief and other documents as mentioned above, by a reasoned and speaking order.

¶27

The writ petition is disposed of. accordingly.

¶28

¶29

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶30

A free copy of this order be handed over to Mr. A.R. Dash, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State for early compliance.

¶31

……………………

¶32

( S. K. Mishra) Judge

¶33

….………………… (Savitri Ratho) Judge

¶34

Uddhaba Bagarti v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uddhaba Bagarti 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bijaya Kumar Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Hiranya Barik Vs State of Odisha

Chitra Mahanand Vs Sangeeta Chhura

Mansuk Munda Vs State of Orissa

Biraja Sankar Mahanta Vs State of Odisha

Krushna Chandra Pollai Vs State of Odisha