Sushanta Samantaray v. Union of India

Orissa HC13 Oct 2025WP(C)/24158/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court writ petition disposed of as withdrawn; petitioners had challenged the arbitrator's order dated 19.09.2024 in Misc. Case No.10/2024 regarding determination of compensation under the National Highways Act, 1956 (including Section 3-G(5)) and the RFCTLARR Act, 2013; Koraput land acquisition; matter withdrawn at counsel's instance to approach the statutory Authority; no merits adjudicated; no precedents cited; no monetary amount awarded.

What did the court decide?

On counsel's prayer for withdrawal of the writ petition (supported by a memo taken on record) so as to seek redressal from the Authority under Section 3-G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956, the Court disposed of the writ petition as withdrawn; the compensation-related grievance was not adjudicated on merits. ¶¶23

Sushanta Samantaray Vs Union of India — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) NO. 24158 OF 2024

¶2

1. Sushanta Samantaray

¶3

2. Sumitra Samantaray 3. Sumanta Samantaray …. Petitioners Mr. Dhananjaya Mund, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

1. Union of India

¶6

2. Chief Engineer National Highway, Odisha

¶7

3. Arbitrator-cum-Collector, Koraput 4. Land Acquisition Officer-cumCALA, Koraput

¶8

5. Chief Construction Engineer, Berhampur

¶9

6. Executive Engineer N.H. Division, Koraput

¶10

…. Opposite Parties

¶11

CORAM:

¶12

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

Order No.

13.10.2025

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶18

2 . Petitioner in this writ petition prays for the following relief;

¶19

“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue Rule Nisi calling upon the Opp. Parties to show cause as to why action of arbitrator shall not be declared as illegal and as to why direction shall not be issued for compliance of procedures in accordance with provisions of law provided under N.Η. Act 1956 & RFCTLARR Act, 2013 regarding determination of appropriate compensation in favour of the petitioners and on perusal of cause shown if found insufficient or wrong, may make the said Rule

¶20

Page 1 of 2

¶21

absolute by quashing the order dated 19.09.2024 passed in Misc. Case No.10/2024 under Annexure-12 and further allowing the writ application directing the arbitrator for compliance of procedure for determination of compensation in favour of the petitioners, and may pass such other order/orders as deemed just and proper. And for this act of kindness, the petitioners shall as in duty bound, ever pray.”

¶22

In course of hearing, Mr. Mund, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays for withdrawal of the writ petition to approach the Authority under Section 3-G (5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 for redressal of his grievances. Hence, a memo is filed in support of his submission, which is taken on record.

¶23