Disposed¶21

Kamala Naik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC12 Mar 2025WP(C)/6292/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.(C) No. 6292 of 2025, Orissa High Court, Cuttack; decided 12.03.2025; coram S.K. Sahoo and Savitri Ratho. Keywords: Kamala Naik; Durga Prasad Jena; State of Odisha; Collector Sundargarh; Special LAO Ultra Mega Power Project Sundargarh; Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 344 of 2013; judgment dated 17.12.2015; Senior Civil Judge Sundargarh; Section 54 Land Acquisition Act; L.A./LAA No. 14 of 2016; Durga Charan Naik; order dated 11.10.2023; accrued interest not paid; Annexure-3 petition; alternative remedy; writ petition disposed, prayer rejected. Award figures noted: Rs.38,94,492/- (Bigyabati Patel; Jayanti Patel), Rs.38,94,493/- (Kunti Patel).

What did the court decide?

None; the prayer made in the writ petition was not accepted and the petition was simply disposed of. ¶21

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the prayer made in the writ petition was not accepted and the petition was simply disposed of.

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether this Court should grant the petitioner's prayer for a direction to the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sundargarh to consider and dispose of her petition under Annexure-3 (concerning the unpaid accrued interest), notwithstanding that an alternative remedy remains available under the order dated 11.10.2023 passed in L.A. No. 14 of 2016.

¶14

Court's answer

The Court declined to accept the prayer made in the application, taking the view that an alternative remedy is available to the parties if interest has not been paid as per the order dated 11.10.2023 passed by this Court in L.A. No. 14 of 2016.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Accordingly, the Writ Petition was disposed of, with no direction issued to the Senior Civil Judge, Sundargarh.

¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Orissa High Court at Cuttack (S.K. Sahoo and Savitri Ratho, JJ.), order dated 12.03.2025, W.P.(C) No. 6292 of 2025 — Kamala Naik v. State of Odisha (Collector, Sundargarh) and Special LAO, Ultra Mega Power Project, Sundargarh. The petitioner sought a direction to the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sundargarh to consider and dispose of her petition under Annexure-3. The Court noted that in Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 344 of 2013 the award entitled Bigyabati Patel (Rs.38,94,492/-), Jayanti Patel (Rs.38,94,492/-) and Kunti Patel (Rs.38,94,493/-); that the writ petition nowhere states how the petitioner relates to those petitioners; and that on 11.10.2023 this Court, dismissing L.A. (LAA) No. 14 of 2016 preferred by Durga Charan Naik under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, had left the referral Court at liberty to disburse the awarded amount in terms of the impugned judgment dated 17.12.2015 with accrued interest. Learned counsel submitted that compensation stood paid but the directed interest remained unpaid. Held: as an alternative remedy is available to the parties if interest has not been paid as per the 11.10.2023 order, the Court was not inclined to accept the prayer and disposed of the writ petition.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 6292 of 2025

¶2

Kamala Naik

¶3

….. Petitioner Mr. Durga Prasad Jena, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

1. State of Odisha represented by the Collector, Sundargarh 2. Special LAO, Ultra Mega Power Project, Sundargarh

¶6

….. Opp. Parties Ms. Subhalaxmi Devi, A.S.C.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

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

ORDER

12.03.2025

Order No.

01.

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

¶14

This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner - Kamala Naik for a direction to the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sundargarh to consider and dispose of the petition under Annexure-3.

¶15

On perusal of the judgment in Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 344 of 2013, it appears that Bigyabani Patel, W/o. Chudamani Patel and Jayanti Patel, W/o. Narsingh Nath Patel were the petitioners in the said case and the awarded was passed that Bigyabati Patel is entitled to receive a sum of Rs.38,94,492/- and Jayanti Patel is entitled to receive a sum of Rs.38,94,492/- and Kunti Patel is entitled to receive a sum of Rs.38,94,493/-.

¶16

Nothing has been mentioned in the writ petition as to how the petitioner - Kamala Naik is related to the aforesaid two petitioners Bigyabati Patel and Jayanti Patel in the said Land Acquisition

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

Reference Case. It further appears that against the judgment dated 17.12.2015 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sundargarh in the Land Acquisition Appeal LAA No. 14 of 2016 was preferred before this Court by one Durga Charan Naik under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act which was disposed of on 11.10.2023 and in the operative part, this Court while dismissing the appeal directed the referral Court is at liberty to disburse the awarded amount in terms of the impugned judgment dated 17.12.2015 along with accrued interest in accordance with law.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners in the Land Acquisition Reference Case have already received the compensation amount, but the interest as was directed to be paid in L.A. No. 14 of 2016 has not been paid to them.

¶20

As we are of the view that since the alternative remedy is available for the parties if interest has not been paid as per the order dated 11.10.2023 passed by this Court in L.A. No. 14 of 2016, we are not inclined to accept the prayer made in this application.

¶21

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶22

(S.K. Sahoo) Judge

¶23

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

¶24

Sukanta/Puspa

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUKANTA KUMAR BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 13-Mar-2025 10:38:23

¶27

Page 2 of 2

Kamala Naik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamala Naik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sitamani Dey Vs State of Odisha

Basanta Kumar Dhal Vs State of Orissa

Santosh Kumar Mohapatra Vs State of Odisha

Farmers Association,Banki Vs State of Odisha

Mukunda Chandra Parida Vs Land Acquisition Officer Cum Collector , Mayurbhanj

Atanu Ghosh Vs Union of India