Bipin Bihari Barik v. State Of Odisha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.22682 of 2022 Bipin Bihari Barik & another ....
Petitioners Mr. S. P. Das Advocate -versusState of Odisha & others ....
Opposite Parties Mr. D.K. Mohanty, Additional Standing Counsel Mr. A. Das, Counsel for the National Highways Authority(Opposite Party No.3).
CORAM:
JUSTICE BISWAJIT MOHANTY JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO Order No.
ORDER
20.10.2022 05.
1.
Heard Mr. S.P. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. D.K. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel and Mr. A. Das, learned counsel representing the National Highways Authority.
2.
In this case, the grievance of the petitioners pertaining to non-release of compensation for forcibly occupying their Plot No.470/1129 covering an area Ac. 0.72 dec. and Plot No.527/1128 covering an area Ac.0.38 dec. without any notification and without paying any compensation.
3.
During course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that liberty may be granted to the petitioners to file a
detailed representation before the Special Land Acquisition Officer and Competent Authority N.H.-215, Keonjhar (Opposite Party No.2) for redressal of their grievances and further submits that a direction be issued to the said Opposite Party to take a decision on such representation of the petitioners within a specific time period. 4.
Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, this Court grants liberty to the petitioners to file a comprehensive representation before the Special Land Acquisition Officer and Competent Authority N.H.- 215, Keonjhar (Opposite Party No.2) within a period of two weeks from today by Registered Post along with a copy of this order. In the event, such a representation is received by the Opposite Party No.2, he is directed to take a decision on the same in accordance with law within a period of two months and communicate the result of such exercise to the petitioner no. 2, who in turn is directed to share the information with petitioner no.1.
5.
Since, consolidated writ application has already been filed, office is directed not to carry out any correction in the prayer portion of the writ petition.
6.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. 7.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules. (Biswajit Mohanty) Judge Balaram (Savitri Ratho) Judge