Thana Sundar Pradhan v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.11360 of 2022 Thanasundar Pradhan ....

Petitioner Mr. Bijaya Kumar Ragada, Advocate -versusState of Odisha & others ....

Opp. Parties Mr. A.R. Dash, Additional Government Advocate

CORAM:

JUSTICE BISWAJIT MOHANTY MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO Order No.

ORDER

21.06.2022 01.

1.

Heard Ms. Agnisikha Ray, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. Bijaya Kumar Ragada, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.R. Dash, learned Additional Government Advocate. 2.

According to Ms. Agnisikha Ray, the petitioner is aggrieved by the action on the part of Land Acquisition Officercum-Tahasildar, Lakhanpur (Opposite Party No.3) in not releasing the land acquisition compensation in respect of L.A. Case No. 16/1-129/2009 in his favour even though the land in question was purchased by his late father vide registered sale deed no. 1269 dated 05.07.1973. His further case is that instead the compensation has been released in favour of the vendor, who after execution of sale deed, should not have been paid any amount. She further submits that though highlighting all his grievances, the petitioner has moved the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Tahasildar, Lakhanpur (Opposite Party No.3) on 14.09.2015 by filing a representation under Annexure-4 series, whose receipt has been duly acknowledged, however, till date

// 2 // nothing has been done in the matter. In such background, she prays that that a direction be issued to the opposite party no.3 to take a decision on the above noted representation within a specific time period.

3.

Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court directs the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Tahasildar, Lakhanpur (Opposite Party No.3) to take a decision on the above noted representation of the petitioner under Annexure-4 series in accordance with law within a period of six months after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the persons named in such representation, who have received the compensation amount and communicate the result of such exercise to the petitioner. It is needless to say that while taking the decision, the opposite party no.3 should keep in mind the interest of all the legal heirs of late father of the petitioner. It is further directed that while presenting a certified copy of this order, the petitioner should supply a copy of the above noted representation dated 14.09.2015 under Annexure-4 series to opposite party no.3.

4.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. 5.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

(Biswajit Mohanty) Judge (Savitri Ratho) Judge puspa

// 3 //