Partly allowed¶19

Udhaba Ch.Barik v. La.Collector,Bhadrak

Orissa HC9 Aug 2024LAA/6/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Land Acquisition Act 1894; Section 54 appeal; compensation enhancement; Rs.1,50,000/- per acre; parity with coordinate-bench judgments; IDCO requisition; Dharani Sugar and Chemicals Limited; villages Helpur, Majurigadia, Pahamahura; Dhamngar Tahasil; Bhadrak Referral Court; L.A. Misc. Case No.322 of 1996; Section 4(1) notifications; statutory benefits; six-week payment direction; Orissa High Court, Cuttack.

What did the court decide?

Compensation @ Rs.1,50,000/- per acre with all other statutory benefits, to be computed and paid within six weeks from the date of communication/production of the certified copy of the order; appeal allowed to the extent indicated and disposed of, with no order as to costs. ¶19

Udhaba Ch.Barik Vs La.Collector,Bhadrak — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the appeal against the Referral Court's compensation order is covered by the coordinate-bench judgments, and if so, at what rate per acre the appellants (claimants) are entitled to compensation for the acquired land.

¶17

Court's answer

The appeal is squarely covered by the coordinate-bench judgments: the class ("kissam") of land is the same, situated in the same village and acquired for the same purpose, though the Section 4(1) notifications were published on different dates.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

The Appellants (claimants before the Referral Court) are entitled to compensation @ Rs.1,50,000/- per acre for the land acquired.

¶17

Key takeaways

The compensation @ Rs.1,50,000/- per acre shall be computed and paid to the Appellants with all other statutory benefits within six weeks from communication/production of the certified copy of the order.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, L.A.A. No.06 of 2012 (Sanjay Kumar Mishra, J.; order dated 09.08.2024). Appeal under Section 54, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by Udhaba Chandra Barik and others against the order dated 15.04.1998 of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhadrak ("Referral Court") in L.A. Misc. Case No.322 of 1996, concerning compensation for Ac.217.71 decimals acquired in villages Helpur, Majurigadia and Pahamahura under Dhamngar Tahasil, on requisition of IDCO for establishing Dharani Sugar and Chemicals Limited. Holding the appeal "squarely covered" by coordinate-bench decisions (L.A.A. No.4 of 2012 and L.A.A. Nos.143 and 144 of 2010, all dated 20.06.2022; L.A.A. No.71 of 2011, order dated 13.03.2024) — the land being of the same class, in the same village and acquired for the same purpose despite differing Section 4(1) notification dates — the Court fixed compensation at Rs.1,50,000/- per acre with all statutory benefits, payable within six weeks of communication/production of the certified copy; the Additional Standing Counsel did not dispute the parity. Appeal allowed to that extent and disposed of; no order as to costs.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

L.A.A. No.06 of 2012

¶3

Udhaba Chandra Barik and …. Appellants others

¶4

Mr. N. Panda, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Land Acquisition Collector, …. Respondent Bhadrak

¶7

Mr. B. Panigrahi, Additional Standing Counsel

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

ORDER

09.08.2024

Order No.

11.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶14

2. Heard Mr. Panda, learned Counsel for the Appellants and Mr. Panigrahi, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Respondent.

¶15

3. The present Appeal has been preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, shortly, L.A. Act, 1894, challenging order dated 15.04.1998 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhadrak (hereinafter referred to as “Referral Court”), in L.A. Misc. Case No.322 of 1996. 4. Mr. Panda, learned Counsel for the Appellants draws attention of this Court to Paragraph-2 of the impugned judgment, vide which it has been clearly mentioned that in terms of various preliminary notifications made under Section 4(I) of the Act,1894, published on different dates in Orissa Gazette Extraordinary, lands measuring an area of

¶16

Ac.217.71 decimals in three Villages i.e. Helpur, Majurigadia and Pahamahura, under Dhamngar Tahasil, were acquired by the State on requisition of IDCO for establishment of a Private Sugar Factory namely, Dharani Sugar and Chemicals Limited in Mouza Majurigadia.

¶17

5. Mr. Panda further submits, this Appeal is covered by the judgments passed by the coordinate Bench in LAA No.4 of 2012 dated 20.06.2022 and LAA No.143 of 2010, L.A.A. No.144 of 2010, both dated 20.06.2022, and order dated 13.03.2024 passed in L.A.A. No.71 of 2011. 6. Copies of the said judgments and order being supplied to the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Respondent, after examining the said judgments and order, Mr. Panigrahi, learned ASC does not dispute the said submission made by Mr. Panda, learned Counsel for the Appellants that the present Appeal is squarely covered by the said judgments passed by this Court, kissam of the land in question being same and situated in the same village so also acquired for the same purpose, though notifications made under Section 4(I) of the Act,1894, were published on different dates. 7. Accordingly, this Appeal stands disposed of holding that the Appellants (claimants before the Referral Court) are entitled to compensation @ Rs.1,50,000/- per acre for acquiring their land. Accordingly, the compensation @ Rs.1,50,000/- per acre be computed and paid to the Appellants with all other statutory benefits within a period of six weeks from the date of communication / production of the certified copy of this order.

¶18

Page 2 of 3

¶19

8. The Appeal is allowed to the extent as indicated above and stands disposed of. No order as to costs.

(S. K. Mishra)

Prasant

Judge

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR PRADHAN Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 10-Aug-2024 13:52:14

¶25

Page 3 of 3

Udhaba Ch.Barik v. La.Collector,Bhadrak

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Udhaba Ch.Barik v. La.Collector,Bhadrak

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rebati Mahanandia Vs Collector,Sundargarh

Arati Jena Vs State and Ors.

Rebati Mahanandia Vs Prabhakar Tanty

Ananta Pr.Barik Vs La.Collector,Bhadrak

Ananta Pr.Barik Vs La.Collector,Bhadrak

Anadi Ch.Swain Vs La.Collector,Bhadrak