Appeal against a referral judgment directing recalculated land acquisition compensation was withdrawn because the compensation had been recalculated and received under protest, giving a fresh cause of action before the Referral Court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
L.A.A. No.25 of 2023
Girish Chandra Mahakul …. Appellant
Mr. S.K. Baral, Advocate
-versus-
Land Acquisition Zone …. Respondent Officer, Boudh
Mr. T. Pattanaik, Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No.
04.
24.01.2024
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Though the matter is on board for consideration of application for exemption of Court fee, on perusal of the averments made in I.A. No. 154 of 2023, which has been filed for condonation of delay in preferring the Appeal, it is ascertained that various facts, as detailed below, have been averred in the said I.A to explain the delay.
3. On perusal of the impugned judgment so also the averments made in the said I.A, it is found that vide the impugned judgment dated 09.02.2022 passed in LAR & R Case No. 12 of 2020, the referral court allowed the referral case on contest and the Land Acquisition Zone Officer (Opposite Party before the Court below) was directed to recalculate the value of the land under Section 26(1) of RFCTLAR&R Act, 2013 adopting all the three procedures
and to take highest value determined under the said three procedures. It was further directed to calculate the amount of compensation as per the order dated 22.06.2018 of Government of Odisha and pay the differential amount to the Petitioner with interest as prescribed under the Act. 4. Being so directed, the Land Acquisition Zone Officer recalculated the compensation amount on 09.03.2023, which was received by the present Appellant under protest on the very same day. Hence, the judgment impugned in the present Appeal has already been implemented/worked out, as being so directed by the court below the Land Acquisition Zone Officer has re-determined the compensation, which has been received by the Appellant under protest on 09.03.2023.
5. The said order of the Land Acquisition Zone Officer being
a fresh cause of action, which is to be decided by the Referral Court, the learned Counsel for the Appellant prays to withdraw the Appeal with liberty to pursue the matter before the Referral Court.
6. Accordingly, the Appeal stands disposed of as withdrawn, with the liberty as prayed for.
(S. K. Mishra)
Judge
Kanhu
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR PRADHAN Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa , Cut tack. Date: 26-Jan-2024 11:43:05
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Should the appeal be permitted to be withdrawn with liberty since the impugned judgment stands implemented through fresh recalculation of compensation?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Girish Chandra Mahakul
Land Acquisition Zone
Sanjay Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
