Disposed

Sunil Kishan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC15 Dec 2022WP(C)/31905/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Writ Petition, the petitioner sought directions for compensation and benefits for his minor daughter under the Land Acquisition Act and Odisha Resettlement Policy. The High Court, without expressing an opinion on merits, directed the Respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass an appropriate order within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party No. 1 to consider the petitioner's representation filed vide Annexure-5 and pass appropriate order within four weeks.

Sunil Kishan Vs State of Odisha — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P (C) No. 31905 of 2022

¶3

Sunil Kishan

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr.R.N.Mohanty, Advocate.

¶6

Vs.

¶7

State of Odisha & Others

¶8

Opposite Parties

¶9

Mr. H.M.Dhal, AGA

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

¶12

MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

15.12.2022

Order No.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶17

2. Heard Mr. R.N.Mohanty, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr.

¶18

H.M.Dhal, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State.

¶19

3. The present Writ Petition has been filed with the following prayer:-

¶20

“a. Admit the writ petition and issue notice to the opp.parties by calling upon them to file show cause and call for the records; and

¶21

b. Issue Writ in the nature of mandamus directing to the O.P. No.02 to dispose of representation dtd.04.08.2022.

¶22

c. Direct the Opp. Parties to pay the compensations and all the benefits to the minor daughter of the petitioner under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 & Odisha Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy 2006; and

¶23

d. Pass any other Writ/Writs and order (s) / direction (s) that your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience”.

¶24

4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that

¶25

Page 1 of 2

¶26

highlighting his grievances, the Petitioner has made a representation to Opposite Party No.1 vide Annexure-5 and the same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection.

¶27

5 . As agreed by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, disposes of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-5 and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶28

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

¶29

sangita

¶30

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

¶31

Page 2 of 2

Sunil Kishan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kishan 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

Bansidhar Sahoo Vs Land Acquisition Officer and Competent Authority, Cuttack

Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd.,Angul Vs Bansidhar Sahu

Bhakta Barik Vs Union of India

Maa Ramachandi Ssg Group, Champapedi Vs State of Odisha

Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., Angul Vs Laxmipriya Pradhan

Bhramar Samal Vs State of Orissa