Subasini Dehury Vs Commissioner-Cum-Secy. — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2024)

Subasini Dehury Vs Commissioner-Cum-Secy. — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

With the above observation and direction, the writ petition was disposed of: petitioners may appear before the Land Acquisition Officer, Dhenkanal to receive the compensation amount as determined, and may thereafter pursue any further claim through the law governing the field.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners are entitled to a direction for payment of compensation @ 12% interest for the acquisition of their agricultural land (Khata No.12, Plot Nos. 2843, 2848, 2849 and 3011, Mouza-Sibapur) for construction of M/s Bhusan Steel Ltd., Kantabania (Meramundali), district Dhenkanal. +1 more

Court's answer

Since notice has already been issued to the petitioners (vide Annexure-C/1) to receive the compensation amount, it is open to them to appear before the Land Acquisition Officer, Dhenkanal and receive the compensation amount as determined by the authority concerned.

Ratio / Principle

Thereafter, if at all the petitioners have any further claim, they may pursue it taking recourse to the law governing the field.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Orissa High Court, Cuttack | W.P (C) No. 4079 of 2016 | Order dated 08.05.2024 | Bench: Dr Justice B.R. Sarangi and Justice G. Satapathy. Petitioners (Subasini Dehury and Sukanti Dehury) sought a direction for payment of compensation with 12% interest for their agricultural land (Khata No.12, Plot Nos. 2843, 2848, 2849 and 3011, Mouza-Sibapur) involved in acquisition for construction of M/s Bhusan Steel Ltd., Kantabania (Meramundali), district Dhenkanal. The counter affidavit recorded that notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was duly served by opposite party no.4 and that both petitioners were noticed on 23.09.2004 (Annexure-C/1) but never came forward to receive the award amount. Observing that the notice to collect compensation had already been issued, the Court directed the petitioners to appear before the Land Acquisition Officer, Dhenkanal to receive the compensation as determined by the authority concerned, reserving to them the liberty to press any further claim through the law governing the field; the writ petition stood disposed of on that direction. No monetary quantum was fixed by the Court; the 12% interest figure appears only as the petitioners' demand.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, AT CUTTACK

W.P (C) No. 4079 of 2016

Subasini Dehury and another

….. Petitioners

Mr. T. Barik, Adv.

Vs.

Commissioner-cum-Secretary, ….. Opposite Parties Revenue and Disaster Management, Bhubaneswar and others

Mr. P.K. Muduli, AGA Mr. A. Pattnaik, Adv.[O.P.No.5] Mr. S.P. Sarangi, Adv.[O.P.Nos.6 & 7]

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

MR. JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

ORDER 08.05.2024

Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 09.

Heard Mr. T. Barik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners; Mr. P.K. Muduli, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the Stateopposite parties; Mr. A. Pattnaik, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.5 and Mr. S.P. Sarangi, learned counsel appearing for opposite parties no.6 and 7.

The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking direction to the opposite parties to pay due compensation @ 12% interest to them in the event of acquisition of agricultural land under Khata No.12, Plot Nos. 2843, 2848, 2849 and 3011 of Mouza- Sibapur for construction of M/s Bhusan Steel Ltd. at Kantabania (Meramundali) in the district of Dhenkanal by following due process of law under Annexure-4 series.

Pursuant to notice, the opposite parties have filed counter affidavit and in paragraph-16 of the counter affidavit, it has been specifically mentioned that though notice under Section 12 (2) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was duly served by the opposite party no.4, but none of the petitioners (awardees) came forward to receive the award amount. Therefore, the claim of the

Page 1 of 2

petitioners cannot be sustained. Further, the document annexed as AnnexureC/1 to the counter affidavit indicates that the petitioner no.1 Subasini Dehury and petitioner no.2-Sukanti Dehury have been duly noticed on 23.09.2004, but they have not appeared before the authority to receive the compensation amount.

In the above view of the matter, since notice has already been issued to the petitioners vide Annexure-C/1 to receive the compensation amount, it is open for them to appear before the Land Acquisition Officer, Dhenkanal for receiving compensation amount, as has been determined by the authority concerned. Thereafter, if at all the petitioners will have any further claim, they may do so taking recourse to law governing the field.

With the above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE

Ashok

(G. SATAPATHY) JUDGE

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA Date: 09-May-2024 14:00:18

Page 2 of 2