Maheswar Mahanta Vs State of Odisha

The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 08.11.2021 under Annexure-5, by which the Collector, Mayurbhanj rejected the claim of the petitioners and stated that the petitioners are not the permanent resident of village Tulasibani where the land has been acquired and, as such, as per the enquiry report and documentary evidences, the petitioners have been residing in village Bandhiari prior to the L.A. Notification vide no.33559 dated 08.06.1987 under Section 4(1) of the L.A. Act, 1894 and, therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to get the R&R benefits formed by the opposite party-authority. The petitioners further seeks direction to the opposite party-authority to provide adequate compensation to them as against the acquisition of their land consisting upon L.A. Case No.62/1987 with immediate effect.

¶16

Mr. B. Mohanty, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the State-opposite parties contended that the land measuring Ac.0.52 decimals

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

under khata no.2, plot no.60, kisam-Gharabari in Mouza-Tulasibani was acquired by the Special Land Acquisition Office, SIP, Baripada in L.A. Case No.62/87 under Section 4(1) of LA Act, 1894, vide notification no.33559 dated 08.06.1987 for canal purpose of the SIP and accordingly L.A. compensation of Rs.47,455/- was paid to the petitioners on 29.03.2015 as per the order of this Court in S.A. No.169 of 1995, which has been acknowledged by the petitioners. Therefore, the claim of the petitioners that they are entitled to get the benefit under R&R scheme cannot be granted. Consequentially, dismissal of the writ petition is sought for.

¶19

Having heard Mr. B. Mohanty, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the State-opposite parties and after going through the records, this Court finds that the undisputed fact being that the land measuring Ac.0.52 decimals under khata no.2, plot no.60, kisam-Gharabari in Mouza-Tulasibani was acquired by the Special Land Acquisition Office, SIP, Baripada in L.A. Case No.62/87 under Section 4(1) of LA Act, 1894, vide notification no.33559 dated 08.06.1987 for canal purpose of the SIP and accordingly L.A. compensation of Rs.47,455/- was paid to the petitioners on 29.03.2015 as per the order of this Court in S.A. No.169 of 1995, which has been acknowledged by the petitioners. But, after the enquiry, it is revealed that the petitioners and others are originally staying at village Bandhiari and Kesarisole, PSJharpokharia of district Mayurbhanj. In the voter list and Aadhaar Card submitted by the petitioners and others, the residential address mentioned as village Bandhiari and Kesarisole. As per the provisions of ORRP-1994, only a project affected person/persons sharing a common kitchen and having ordinary residential status in the village where the land is acquired can only be treated as original family. Further, he should have to be an ordinary resident in the said area/village prior to one year of the Section 4(1) notification under LA Act, 1894 in order to enable him to get R&R benefits. In this regard, the Nodal Officer, PG Cell, Collectorate, Baripada was intimated vide office letter no.430

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

dated 29.09.2020 with a copy to the Tahasildar, Saraskana and to the petitioners. Thereafter, the petitioners filed objection before the Collector and District Magistrate, Mayurbhanj being aggrieved by the report dated 29.09.2020. As per the orders of Collector, the District Office, Mayurbhanj requested the PD (R&R), SIP, Laxmiposi vide memo dated 28.07.2021 to submit the status report of the case of the petitioners basing on the orders of the District Magistrate, Mayurbhanj passed in Misc. Case No.12/2021. Accordingly, on enquiry in the field, the report regarding the permanent residential status was submitted to the Collector, vide office letters dated 02.08.2021 and 08.10.2021, with the statement of local persons of village Tulasibani. It is found that the name of the petitioners find place in the voter list of 1993 at sl.no.405 with holding no.323 of villagte Kesarisole and, as such, the names of the petitioners do not find mentioned in the village-Tulasibani. As such, copy of the enquiry report dated 08.10.2021, genealogy prepared by the feedback of locality, the statement of 3 nos. of canal displaced families of village Tulasibani and the voter list for the year 1993 of village Kesarisole clearly indicate that the petitioners are not permanent resident of Tulasibani and, therefore, the R&R benefit is not applicable to them.

¶22

In such view of the matter, this Court is of the considered view that since the petitioners do not come within the purview of the scheme, the benefit cannot be granted to them, as they are not permanent resident of Tulasibani.

¶23

In the above view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed.

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA Designation: Secretary Ashok Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA Date: 07-May-2024 15:48:11

¶26

(G. SATAPATHY) JUDGE

¶27

Page 3 of 3

Maheswar Mahanta v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maheswar Mahanta v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md.Iqubal Vs Commnr.,Kendriya Vid

Srinibash Maity Vs State of Odisha

R.Mohan Das Ajaya Kumar Vs State of Odisha

M/S. Aftab Ali, Jharsuguda Vs Dy. Commnr. GST and Central Excise, Jharsuguda

Bikram Bhoi Vs Revenue Divisional Commissioner(North Division)

Ranjan Ku.Pradhan Vs State of Odisha