Land acquisition appeal seeking compensation for land acquired under Section 4 notifications for a sugar factory. Court found the appeal covered by earlier judgments on same village and purpose and awarded compensation at Rs.1,50,000/- per acre.
Compensation at Rs.1,50,000/- per acre plus statutory benefits within six weeks
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.65 of 2011
Damodar Barik …. Appellant Mr. N. Panda, Advocate
-versus-
Land Acquisition Collector, Bhadrak
…. Respondent
Mr. S.K. Brahma, ASC
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
ORDER
13.12.2024
Order No.
09.
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr. Panda, learned Counsel for the Appellant and Mr. S.K. Brahma, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Respondent.
3. The present Appeal has been preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, shortly, L.A. Act, 1894, challenging order dated 27.02.1998 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhadrak (hereinafter referred to as “Referral Court”), in L.A. Misc. Case No.308 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 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 Helpur.
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, order dated 13.03.2024 passed in L.A.A. No.71 of 2011 and recent order passed by this Court dated 09.08.2024 in LAA No.61 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. S.K. Brahma, learned ASC does not dispute the said submission made by Mr. Panda, learned Counsel for the Appellant 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.
Page 2 of 3
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.
8. The Appeal is allowed to the extent, as indicated above, and stands disposed of. No order as to costs.
(S. K. MISHRA)
Banita
JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: BANITA PRIYADARSHINI PALEI Designation: SR. STENOGRAPHER Reason: AUTHENTICATION Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 16-Dec-2024 11:15:57
Page 3 of 3
1 issue framed by the court
What compensation per acre should be paid for land acquired for a sugar factory, given identical appeals were adjudicated at Rs.1,50,000/- per acre?
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Damodar Barik
Land Acquisition Collector, Bhadrak
Sanjay Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
