Disposed¶24

Jani Senapati v. Union of India

Orissa HC18 Feb 2025WP(C)/4663/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jani Senapati v. Union of India and others; W.P.(C) No.4663 of 2025; Orissa High Court at Cuttack; order dated 18.02.2025; writ petition disposed of as withdrawn; withdrawal due to availability of alternative remedy; land acquisition compensation; balance compensation; market valuation; NH authorities; valuation report dated 27.11.2023; sale deed dated 18.11.2021; plot no-96, khata no-155/44, Ac.0.01 decimal, Mouza Deuli; urgent certified copy; no merits decided.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition; petition disposed of as withdrawn, enabling the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance. ¶24

Jani Senapati Vs Union of India — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.4663 of 2025

¶3

Jani Senapati ….. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Bibhuti Bhusan Panda, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Union of India and others

¶7

..... Opp. Parties

¶8

Mrs. Sephalee Das, Central Govt. Counsel for opp. party nos.1 and 2

¶9

Mr. Aurobinda Mohanty, Addl. Standing Counsel for opp. party nos.3 to 12

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

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

¶12

THE HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

Order No.

18.02.2025

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

¶17

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RAJESH KUMAR BADHEI Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 20-Feb-2025 18:35:30

¶18

Mrs. Sephalee Das, learned Central Govt. Counsel has filed memo of appearance on behalf of Union of India, which is taken on record.

¶19

The petitioner, Jani Senapati has filed this writ petition with the following prayer:

¶20

“That, the petitioner humbly prays that your Lordship’s may graciously be pleased to admit the writ application, issue notice to the opp. parties and calling upon them to file show cause as to why the proper valuation of the

¶21

Page 1 of 2

¶22

land and building situated under plot no-96, khata no-155/44 measuring an total area Ac.0.01 decimal of MouzaDeuli, P.S.Manamunda, P.S. No.111, Kissam- Gharabadi shall not be made by the NH authorities according to the present market valuation given by the petitioner as per the valuation report dated 27.11.2023 and sale deed dated 18.11.2021 under Annexure-4 series and if the opp. parties does not file show cause or insufficient cause, this Hon’ble Court would be pleased to direct the opp. parties to accept the valuation report submitted by the petitioner under Annexure-4 series and to pay the balance amount of compensation deducting the amount of alleged compensation which the opp. parties have paid to the petitioner.”

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since alternative remedy is available to the petitioner, he wants to withdraw this writ petition to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance.

¶24

In view of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition stands disposed of as withdrawn.

¶25

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

¶26

( S.K. Sahoo)

¶27

Judge

¶28

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

¶29

sipun

¶30

Page 2 of 2

Jani Senapati v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jani Senapati v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurudev Das Vs State of Odisha

Trilochan Mallick Vs State

Jugeswari Kusum @ Ganda Vs Saraswati Singh

Raj Kumar Bag Vs State of Odisha

Muktikanta Barik Vs State of Odisha

Pari@Paria Nayak Vs State