Bhagabati Nayak v. The Special Lao, Keonjhar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P (C) No. 18580 of 2022 Bhagabati Nayak & Others .....
Petitioners Mr.B.Singh, Advocate.
Vs.
The Special LAO, Keonjhar & Others .....
Opposite Parties Mr. P.K.Muduli, AGA
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
09.11.2022 Order No.
06.
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2.
Heard Mr. B.Singh, learned counsel for Petitioners and Mr.P.K.Muduli, learned counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Parties. 3.
The present Writ Petition has been filed with the following prayer:- " The petitioners therefore prayed that your Lordships may graciously be pleased to issue Rule "NISI" calling upon the opposite parties no.1 to 3 to show as to why the compensation amount passed vide Annexure-5 in favour of petitioners along with their co-shareholders i.e. proforma opp.party no.4 & 5 along with interest as the amount has kept in fixed deposit shall not be released in favour of them who are the rightful owner of properties so acquired and if opp.party fails to show cause or show insufficient cause make the rule absolute and allow this writ petition with cost".
4.
In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioners states that highlighting their grievances, the Petitioners have made representation to Opposite Party No.9 vide Annexure-2 and the same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection.
5.
As agreed by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, disposes of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation filed by the petitioners vide Annexure-9, and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
Subrat (DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE (B. P. SATAPATHY) JUDGE