Disposed

Nalini Prava Rout v. Bbsr Municipal Corporation

Orissa HC5 Apr 2024WP(C)/22464/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court directed BMC to delay drain construction, supply info to Tahasildar, and conduct immediate demarcation with petitioner present to ascertain acquisition extent before finalizing acquisition under Section 288.

What did the court decide?

BMC directed to supply info, complete demarcation with petitioner present, and discontinue drain construction until demarcation concludes; petitioner to file compensation claim thereafter.

Nalini Prava Rout Vs Bbsr Municipal Corporation — Public Procurement and Tenders | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.22464 of 2023

¶3

Nalini Prava Rout …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Banshidhar Baug, Advocate

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation, …. Opposite Parties Bhubaneswar & others

¶7

Mr. D.K. Behera, ASC Mr. D. Mohapatra, Advocate for BDA Mr. N.Panda-1, Advocate for BMC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

Order No.

05.04.2024

Heard Mr. Baug, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Panda, learned counsel for opposite party Nos.1 and 2 besides learned counsel for opposite party Nos.3 to 5.

¶15

Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner for a direction to the opposite parties not to take up construction of drain work over and in respect of the schedule plot without following due process of law on the grounds stated therein.

¶16

Mr. Baug, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Plot No.909/3017 stands recorded with the petitioner and while claiming so, he refers to a copy of the RoR as at Annexure-1. Such possession of the land in question is also supported by the rent receipts as at Annexure-2 and Mr. Baug would further submit that due process has not been followed complying Section 288 of the Odisha Municipal Corporation Act.

¶17

Page 1 of 4

¶18

In reply, Mr. Panda, learned counsel for opposite party Nos.1 and 2 submits that BMC is ready to pay compensation to the petitioner with the acquisition of the plot in question, since a decision to acquire an area of Ac.0.054 decimal from Plot No.909 of Mouza-Bhimpur has been taken for the drain construction in order to ensure smooth flow of water from the Airport area of Bhubaneswar and to channelize it to the main Drain No.7.

¶19

In course of hearing, Mr. Panda referring the counter affidavit and Annexure-C/2 thereto claims that necessary information has been asked for from the local Tahasildar in respect of the plots, which stand recorded in the name of private persons, since the original plot stands in the name of Gopaluni Thakurani Bije, Bhubaneswar under Khata No.544/708, Mr. Baug, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the rejoinder affidavit and a letter dated 2023 addressed to the petitioner and claims that due procedure has not been followed for the purpose of acquisition of land with respect to Plot No.909/3017 owned by her. In response to the above, Mr. Panda refers to the Office Order dated 12^th June, 2023 as at Annexure-B/2 of the counter affidavit with regard to the decision for the construction of drain work exercising power under Section 288 of the Odisha Municipal Corporation Act and the need to file claims for compensation by the owners of the plots in possession. Furthermore, placing reliance on Annexure-F/2 to the reply of rejoinder affidavit, Mr. Panda would submit that check lists have been prepared and process has been duly followed with a request to the petitioner to submit a copy of the sale deed and E.C. from 1989 and onwards, which has been responded to by Annexure-G/2.

¶20

It is submitted by Mr. Baug, learned counsel for the petitioner that till such time, the process of acquisition is concluded,

¶21

Page 2 of 4

¶22

the construction of the drain work should not be allowed to take place. Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the BMC opposite party Nos.1 and 2 would submit that unless and until the extent of land, whether the entire of the plot owned by the petitioner or part of the same is required for the alleged construction of drain work is determined, the compensation cannot be paid. In fact, a request is pending with the local Tahasildar vide Annexure-C/2 dated 21^st July, 2023 to provide the necessary information to further the process of acquisition.

¶23

Considering the facts pleaded on record and submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties, of course process for acquisition has been initiated in consonance with Section 288 of the Odisha Municipal Corporation Act, the Court is of the view that unless a demarcation is held to find out and ascertain the extent of land to be acquired from Plot No.909/3017, the construction work is likely to be delayed. The Court is of the further view that all such information, which has been sought for in view of Annexure-C/2 is required to be supplied to opposite party Nos.1 and 2 and also to render the assistance for the purpose of demarcation of the plot in question so that the process of acquisition can be concluded at the earliest. So therefore, the conclusion of the Court that first and foremost, the local authority is to supply the necessary information to opposite party Nos.1 and 2 and at the same time to undertake the demarcation in respect of the alleged plot and also the plots adjoining to ascertain the extent of area to be acquired for the alleged purpose and till such time, should discontinue the construction. The Court is also of the view that once demarcation is accomplished, the petitioner would submit the claim application for compensation in response to Annexure-D/2 of opposite party No.2.

¶24

Hence, it is ordered.

¶25

Page 3 of 4

¶26

In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to opposite party Nos.1 and 2 to undertake the exercise for demarcation with the assistance of the local Tahasildar on receipt of necessary information required as per Annexure-C/2 and thereafter, to proceed to acquire the land as per and in accordance with law. It is further directed that such demarcation shall be held in the immediate presence of the petitioner with prior intimation about the same and till such time, the demarcation is completed, the construction of drain work is to be discontinued. The Court further directs that on completion of the demarcation process and the extent of land to be acquired for the purpose of acquisition, the petitioner shall submit the claim application for compensation according to law.

¶27

Urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.

¶28

(R.K. Pattanaik)

¶29

Balaram Judge

¶30

Page 4 of 4

Nalini Prava Rout v. Bbsr Municipal Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nalini Prava Rout v. Bbsr Municipal Corporation

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

Divl. Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Mamata Prusty

Shiba Shankar Pal @ Shiba Prasad Pal Vs State of Odisha

Khokan Samanta Vs State of Odisha

Nibash Barik Vs State of Odisha

Prasana Behera Vs Sachidananda Naik, O.A.S.

Sweta Rungta Vs Union of India