Disposed

Bhagyadhar Pradhan v. Land Acquisition Officer and Competent Authority, Ctc

Orissa HC8 Dec 2022WP(C)/27649/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition sought a direction to release compensation determined under an amicable settlement while proceedings for apportionment were pending before the District Judge. The court held that since the settlement was executed, the petitioners could approach the learned District Judge in NHLA Case No. 02/2022 for the appropriate order under Section 3H(4) of the N.H. Act, 1956. The writ petition wa

What did the court decide?

None granted; petitioners directed to approach the District Judge in NHLA Case No. 02/2022 for appropriate order on apportionment under Section 3H(4) of the N.H. Act, 1956.

Bhagyadhar Pradhan Vs Land Acquisition Officer and Competent… — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P (C) No. 27649 of 2022

¶3

Bhgyadhar Pradhan and others

¶4

Petitioners

¶5

….. Mr. S.P. Das, Advocate

¶6

Vs. ….. Land Acquisition Officer and Opposite Parties Competent Authority, Cuttack and another.

¶7

Mr. A. Das, Advocate (O.P.2)

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

¶10

MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

¶11

ORDER

¶12

08.12.2022

¶13

Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 01. 2. Heard Mr. S.P. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. A. Das, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

¶14

The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking direction to opposite party no.1 to release the compensation determined under Annexure-3 in favour of the petitioners keeping in view the affidavit under Annexure-5 series. The petitioners have further prayed for a direction to the effect that pendency of proceeding before the learned District Judge with regard to apportionment shall not be a bar for the Land Acquisition Officer to release the compensation amount. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners and the co-sharers have gone for an amicable settlement by executing affidavit under Annexure-5 series. Therefore, taking into consideration of the said amicable settlement, the amount of compensation should have been released in favour of the petitioners.

¶15

Mr. A. Das, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2 by

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

filing a counter affidavit contended that the matter is pending before the learned District Judge, Cuttack in NHLA (REF) Case No. 02/2022 under Section 3H(4) of the N.H. Act, 1956. Therefore, if the petitioners are claiming for the apportionment of the compensation amount and release of the same in their favour on the basis of the amicable settlement, they may approach the said forum, so that the matter can be disposed of in accordance with law.

¶18

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, since the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and the petitioners claims the apportionment of the compensation amount and release of the same in their favour on the basis of the amicable settlement, it is open to the petitioners to approach the learned District Judge, Cuttack in NHLA (REF) Case No. 02/2022 under Section 3H(4) of the N.H. Act, 1956, so that learned District Judge can pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

¶19

With the above observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶20

Arun

¶21

(DR. B.R. SARANGI)
JUDGE
(B. P. SATAPATHY)
JUDGE

¶22

Page 2 of 2

Bhagyadhar Pradhan v. Land Acquisition Officer and Competent Authority, Ctc

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagyadhar Pradhan v. Land Acquisition Officer and Competent Authority, Ctc

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

M/S. Fast Communication Vs State of Orissa

Thakit Kujur Vs Collector and District Magistrate, Jharsuguda

Omm Construction, Angul Vs Union of India

Bansidhar Sahoo Vs Land Acquisition Officer and Competent Authority, Ctc

Gitanjali Sahoo Vs L.A.O. and Competent Authority, NH-42, Cuttack

Chandra Prava Mohanty Vs State of Odisha