Dismissed

Venkateswar Rao Kutadi v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC2 May 2024WP(C)/4493/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a quashing order under the R.F.C. Act regarding unpaid land compensation awarded under a Resettlement Development Plan. The Court avoided expressing an opinion on merits but directed the petitioner to approach the competent authority for adjudication as per law.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to approach the competent authority under Section 64 of the RFCTLARRA Act for adjudication; writ petition disposed without expressing opinion on merits.

Venkateswar Rao Kutadi Vs State of Odisha — Execution and Attachment | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.4493 of 2019

¶2

Venkateswar Rao Kutadi

¶3

….. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. B.S. Panigrahi, Advocate Vs.

¶5

State of Odisha and others

¶6

….. Opposite Parties

¶7

Mr. B. Mohanty, AGA

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

¶10

ORDER 02.05.2024

¶11

Order No. This matter is taken up by hybrid mode. 04.

¶12

Heard Mr. B.S. Panigrahi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. B. Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Parties.

¶13

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 27.07.2018 passed in L.A. Case No.35 of 2016 by the Opposite Party No.2 under Annexure-10 and further to issue direction to the Opposite Parties to issue fresh order for receiving the entire compensation award against his purchased land in terms of R.S.D. as in Annexure-3.

¶14

Mr. B.S. Panigrahi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is the purchaser of the land. Though, compensation amount has been awarded, the same has not been paid to the petitioner. Therefore, he approached this Court by filing this writ petition.

¶15

Mr. B. Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate contended that in view of the provisions contained in Section 64 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, the petitioner has to approach the appropriate forum.

¶18

Considering the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of this case, disposes of this writ petition permitting the petitioner to approach the competent authority under Section 64 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act. In the event, the petitioner approaches, the competent authority shall adjudicate and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

¶19

(DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE

¶20

Subhasmita

¶21

(G. SATAPATHY) JUDGE

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA DAS Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 03-May-2024 16:27:01

¶24

Page 2 of 2

Venkateswar Rao Kutadi v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkateswar Rao Kutadi v. State of Odisha

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

Prafulla Chandra Panda Vs State of Odisha

M/S Mackintosh Burn Ltd., Kolkata Vs State of Odisha

M/S.Zenith Steels Vs Union of India

Commissioner of Customs(Preventive),Bbsr Vs Sunil Verma

Laba Buda Vs State of Orissa

Shankar Mishra Vs East Coast Railway