Niranjan Pradhan & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Bench
- S K MISHRA
Outcome
Withdrawn
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn
Provisions considered
- Railways Act, 1989 s. 39
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with an observation that the Petitioner, if so advised, may work out remedy in accordance with law.
Judgment
Mr.Satyajit Mohapatra (2), Advocate -versus- Union of India and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. Manmaya Kumar Dash, ASC Mr.Prasanna Kumar Parhi, DSGI Mr. Santosh Kumar Samantaray, CGC CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA ORDER 22.01.2026 Order No.
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. The Petitioner, in this writ petition, prays for the following relief:-
Under circumstances, petitioners prays that your Lordships may be graciously pleased to consider the facts stated in this petition, admit the same , issue notice to the Opp. parties, call for the records and calling upon them to file show cause as to why this writ petition shall not be allowed if they fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, this writ application may kindly be allowed and the order dtd. 03.12.2025 and 24.12.2025 passed by the 0pp. No. 5 i.e. Competent Authority Land Acquisition cum Tahasildar, Jharsuguda in Misc. case No. 4/2025 arising out of L.A. No. 02/2020 may kindly be quashed and Consequential eviction notice dtd. 08.01.2026 issued by the 0pp. No. 3 i.e. XEN/ CON/ JSC, South East Central Railway, Jharsuguda may kindly be quashed. Further this Hon'ble Court may kindly be directed the Opp. No. 5 to provide the compensation of Pucca RCC roof structure value standing over Plot No. 67/501, Khata No. 29, Area Ac 0.8200 dec , Mouza-Beherapalli under Tahasil- Jharsuguda accordance with Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for secure ends of justice. And/or pass any other order/orders, direction/ directions as may be deemed just and proper in favour of the petitioner. And for this act of kindness, the petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray.
In course of argument, Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that he has remedy under Section 39 of the Railways Act, 1989 to move the learned Tribunal against the order impugned herein. Hence, he prays for withdrawal of the writ petition to avail the statutory remedy.
Mr. Dash, learned Additional Standing Counsel and Mr. Parhi, learned DSGI have no objection to the prayer for withdrawal of the writ petition.
Operative part
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with an observation that the Petitioner, if so advised, may work out remedy in accordance with law.
Certified copy of document(s), if any filed, be returned to the learned counsel for the Petitioners on substitution of attested photocopy thereof.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order on proper application. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: HIMANSU SEKHAR DASH Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 22-Jan-2026 20:16:55 Himansu (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (S.K. Mishra) Judge
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Railways Act, 1989 — s. 39.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.