Chanchala Naik Vs State of Odisha — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2025)

Chanchala Naik Vs State of Odisha — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to Opp. Party No.3 (Land Acquisition Officer, Kalahandi) to dispose of the petitioner's Section 28-A application filed on 06.04.2013 in L.A. Case No.4 of 2003 in accordance with law within six months of production of certified copy of the order, with further direction to disburse the compensation amount expeditiously if the application is allowed and no other legal impediment exists; liberty reserved to opposite parties to seek valuation/modification/recall.

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction should issue to the Land Acquisition Officer, Kalahandi (Opp. Party No.3) to dispose of the petitioner's application under Section 28-A of the L.A. Act filed on 06.04.2013 in L.A. Case No.4 of 2003.

Court's answer

Writ petition disposed of by directing Opp. Party No.3 (Land Acquisition Officer, Kalahandi) to dispose of the petitioner's application under Section 28-A of the L.A. Act filed on 06.04.2013 in L.A. Case No.4 of 2003 in accordance with law within six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

Ratio / Principle

Further directed that if the Section 28-A application is allowed and there is no other legal impediment, the compensation amount be disbursed expeditiously.

Key takeaways

As the writ application was disposed of without notice to the opposite parties, liberty is granted to them to apply for valuation/modification/recall of this order if the situation so demands or if the averments in the writ petition/affidavit or the submissions of counsel are not correct.ratio¶25
The writ petition was disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (W.P.(C) No.2388 of 2025, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, order dated 20.02.2025, coram S.K. Sahoo and Savitri Ratho, JJ.) — Chanchala Naik v. State of Odisha and others. The petitioner, claiming to be recorded owner of plot No.570, Khata No.81, Mouza Karlakhunta (Area 0.32 dec.), prayed for adjudication, sanction and disbursement of compensation pursuant to her application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 filed on 06.04.2013 (Annexure-2) in L.A. Case No.04 of 2003, in terms of the award dated 02.02.2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Bhawanipatna in LAR No.50 of 2012 (reference case under Section 18 of the L.A. Act), which application lay undisposed before the Land Acquisition Officer, Kalahandi (Opp. Party No.3). Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing Opp. Party No.3 to dispose of the Section 28-A application in accordance with law within six months from production of certified copy of the order, and further directing that if the application is allowed and there is no other legal impediment, the compensation amount be disbursed expeditiously. As disposal occurred without notice to the opposite parties, liberty was reserved to them to apply for valuation/modification/recall of the order.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.2388 of 2025

Chanchala Naik …. Petitioner

Mr. D. Mund, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha and …. Opp. Parties others

Mr. Aurobinda Mohanty, Addl. Standing Counsel

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO

THE HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

20.02.2025

Order No.

01.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

In terms of the order dated 04.02.2025, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an affidavit of the petitioner where in paragraph no.3, it is stated as follows:-

“That, it is humbly submitted that the reference case U/s. 18 of the L.A. Act vide LAR No. 50 of 2012 was disposed of on dated 02.02.2013 and after obtaining certified copy of the order, the petitioner filed an application U/s. 28-A of the L.A. Act under Annexure-2 before the Collector & the Land Acquisition Officer, Kalahandi on 06.04.2013 which is within the prescribed period of limitation of 90 days. The Land Acquisition Officer, Kalahandi received the said petition, put signature and date which is also evident from the first page of the petition Annexure-2”.

Page 1 of 3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner Chanchala Naik who claims to be the recorded owner of plot No.570, Khata No.81, Mouza Karlakhunta (Area 0.32 dec.), has filed this writ petition with a prayer to direct the opposite parties to adjudicate, sanction and disburse the compensation amount in connection with the petition under section 28-A of the L.A. Act filed by the petitioner under Annexure-2 in L.A. Case No.04 of 2003 in terms of the award dated 02.02.2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Bhawanipatna in LAR No.50 of 2012 within a stipulated time.

Mr. D. Mund, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the nondisposal of her application filed on 06.04.2013 under section 28-A, of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 arising out of L.A.R. No.50 of 2012 pending before the Land Acquisition Officer, Kalahandi (OPP. Party No.3). In such background, he prays that a direction may be issued to the Opp. Party No.3 to dispose of the said application expeditiously.

Considering the submission made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the writ petition directing the Opp. Party No.3 to dispose of the application under section 28-A of the L.A. Act filed on 06.04.2013 in L.A. Case No. 4 of 2003 in accordance with law within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. It is

Page 2 of 3

further directed that in case the application of the petitioner under section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is allowed, and if there is no other legal impediment, the compensation amount be disbursed expeditiously.

As the writ application is disposed of without notice

to the opposite parties, liberty is granted to them to apply for valuation/modification/recall of this order in case the situation so demands and/or if the averments in the writ petition/affidavit or the submission of the counsel are not correct.

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

( S.K. Sahoo)

( Savitri Ratho)

Pravakar

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRAVAKAR NAYAK Designation: AR-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 28-Feb-2025 10:31:18

Page 3 of 3