Santosh Kumar Panda v. State Of Orissa

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P (C) No. 27698 of 2022 Santosh Kumar Panda .....

Petitioner Mr.M.Ojha, Advocate.

Vs.

State of Odisha & Others .....

Opposite Parties Mr.H.M.Dhal, AGA

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

14.11.2022 Order No.

01.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2.

Heard Mr. M.Ojha, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr.H.M.Dhal, learned Additional Government Advocate. 3.

According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the authorities visa-vis acquisition of part of the land covered by Plot No.771, falling under Khata No.317 of Mouza:Hatijhari in connection with L.A. Case No.20 of 2019. According to him, the quantum of compensation indicated at Annexure-5 at Rs.1,36,112/- by the Zone Officer-cum-L.A. Collector, S.I.P., Baripada Zone, Mayurbhanj vide his letter dated 03.06.2022 is much less vis-a-vis the bench mark valuation of the land prescribed for that area.

4.

Mr.Dhal submits that for such purposes, the petitioner should have approached the appropriate authority i.e. opposite party No.2 under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land

Acquisition Act, 2013 instead of rushing to this Court. 5.

In such background, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to approach the Zone Officer-cumL.A. Collector, Mayurbhanj (opposite party No.2) in the matter by filing a representation and the said opposite party be directed to take a decision on such motion within a specific time period.

6.

Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court grants liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before opposite party No.2 through registered post within a period of two weeks from today. In the event, such a petition is filed along with a copy of this order, the opposite party No.2 is directed to take a decision on the same in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of such representation and communicate the result of such exercise to the petitioner. 7.

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. 8.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. Subrat (DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE (B. P. SATAPATHY) JUDGE