Manoranjan Mishra Vs State of Odisha — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2025)

Manoranjan Mishra Vs State of Odisha — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to opposite party no.2 (General Manager, Lingaraj Area, Talcher) to take a decision on the petitioner's representation vide Annexure-4, if still pending, in accordance with law within four months of production of a certified copy of the order, and to communicate the decision to the petitioner within two weeks; personal hearing may be afforded if felt necessary.

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction should be issued to the opposite parties to extend resettlement benefits to the petitioner for compulsory acquisition of his land, and to consider his representation dated 29.04.2024 (Annexure-4) within a stipulated period.

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to opposite party no.2, the General Manager, Lingaraj Area, Talcher, to take a decision on the petitioner's representation vide Annexure-4 if still pending.

Ratio / Principle

The decision on the representation is to be taken in accordance with law within four months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order, if there is no other impediment.

Key takeaways

The decision so taken is to be communicated to the petitioner within two weeks, and if felt necessary, a personal hearing may be afforded to the petitioner.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (W.P.(C) No. 6071 of 2025) by Manoranjan Mishra seeking a direction to the opposite parties to extend resettlement benefits for compulsory acquisition of his land in terms of Clauses 7 and 8 of the Odisha Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy 2006 read with Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. His representation dated 29.04.2024 (Annexure-4) before opposite party no.2, the General Manager, Lingaraj Area, Talcher, remained unactioned. Learned counsel for the State raised no serious objection. Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Bench (S.K. Sahoo and Savitri Ratho, JJ.; order signed by Savitri Ratho, J.) disposed of the writ petition directing opposite party no.2 to take a decision on the representation, if still pending, in accordance with law within four months from production of a certified copy of the order, and to communicate the decision to the petitioner within two weeks of taking it; a personal hearing may be afforded if felt necessary. Urgent certified copy as per Rules.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No. 6071 of 2025

Manoranjan Mishra

….. Petitioners Mr. Prabin Das, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha & Others

Opp. Parties Mr. Debasish Nayak, A.G.A.

CORAM:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO THE HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

06.03.2025

Order No.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video 02. conferencing/physical mode).

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

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the corrected cause title.

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for a direction to the opposite parties to extend the resettlement benefits to the Petitioner for compulsory acquisition of his land in terms of Clauses 7 and 8 of the Odisha Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy 2006 read with Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 within stipulated period.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner Manoranjan Mishra has submitted a representation highlighting his grievances before the opposite party no.2- the General Manager, Lingaraj Area, Talcher on 29.04.2024 under Annexure-4, but no action has been taken thereof and therefore, appropriate order may

Page 1 of 2

be passed directing the opposite parties to consider the representation under Annexure-4 within a specified period in accordance with law.

Learned counsel for the State has no serious objection to such submission.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the writ petition directing the opposite party no.2, the General Manager, Lingaraj Area, Talcher to take a decision on the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-4 if it is still pending, in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order if there is no other impediment and to communicate the order to the petitioner within a period of two weeks of taking such decision. If felt necessary, personal hearing may be afforded to the petitioner.

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

Sukanta/Puspa

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUKANTA KUMAR BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 08-Mar-2025 10:46:45

Page 2 of 2