The High Court
Case Details
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK Date: 09-Sep-2025 13:48:45 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 8008 OF 2023 Kishore Chandra Deo Petitioner Mr. Sourav Suman Bhuyan, Advocate …. State of Odisha and others -versus- …. Opp. Parties Mr. Syayambhu Mishra, Additional Standing Counsel CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER 03.09.2025 This mater is taken up through hybrid mode.
Decision
Petitioner in the writ petition seeks to assail the order dated Order No. 5. 1. 2. 16th April, 2022 (Annexure-8) passed by the Collector, Cuttack pursuant to the direction dated 23rd February, 2022 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.892 of 2022. 3. The case of the Petitioner as submitted by Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel that residential house of the Petitioner stands over Plot Nos.187 (part) and 289 (part) under Sabik Khata No.94 measuring an area of 25 feet x 50 feet bearing Municipal Holding No.287/B/2 in mouza Sana Jobra under Mangalabag Police Station in Town/Dist: Cuttack (for brevity, ‘the case land’). A proceeding under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) was initiated in respect of the case land for determination of the amount of compensation as well as extending the benefit under the Resettlement and Rehabilitation Scheme (for brevity ‘Rehabilitation and Resettlement Package’). Initially, the authorities suggested to purchase the case land from the Petitioner, Page 1 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK Date: 09-Sep-2025 13:48:45 but they did not take any action on the same for which the Petitioner moved this Court in W.P.(C) No.16169 of 2020 for a direction to the authorities to act in accordance with the law. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 16th July, 2020 with the following direction; “4. Having regard to the nature of grievance, we dispose of this writ petition requiring the petitioner to approach opposite party no.3-Collector, Cuttack along with copy of this order as well as copy of the writ petition which will be treated as a representation. Opposite party no.3-Collector, Cuttack shall do the needful and consider the case of the petitioner to extend the benefits provided under the rehabilitation package of the State Government as per his entitlement under the Rehabilitation Scheme in accordance with law, within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order along with copy of the writ petition.” Pursuant to the aforesaid direction of this Court, Collector, Cuttack-Opposite Party No.3 passed an order on 14th July, 2021 holding that the Petitioner comes under the category of families other than slum dwellers having residential house on government land in privileged area. Thus, he held that the Petitioner is not entitled to any compensation under the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Package. Petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 14th July, 2021 passed by the Collector, Cuttack, made a representation on 17th August, 2021 to the Collector, Cuttack to reconsider the matter. Despite such representation of the Petitioner, the Collector, Cuttack did not take any action and on the other hand threatened to demolish the existing structure of the Petitioner and to take possession of the case land. 3.1 The Petitioner being aggrieved, filed W.P.(C) No.27171 of 2021 for a direction to the authority to follow provisions of the Act and to pay compensation. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 8th September, 2021 with the following direction. Page 2 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK Date: 09-Sep-2025 13:48:45 “5. It is directed that subject to the filing of the above affidavits of undertaking, no coercive action against the Petitioner will be taken by the Opposite Parties prior to 1st October, 2021. 6. The order dated 16th July 2020 of this Court in W.P.(C) No.16169 of 2020 (Mallick Krupasindhu Birabara Deo v. State of Odisha and Others) records the submission of Mr. D. K. Mohanty, learned AGA that the parties will be compensated for the structures and not for the land in terms of the R & R Notification No.25896 dated 28th August, 2020. That will hold good for the present petition as well. 7. The writ petition and the I.A. are disposed of in the above terms. 8. An urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.” Pursuant to the said direction of this Court, the Petitioner submitted an affidavit and undertook to vacate the possession of the dwelling house. Thus, the Petitioner was allowed time to vacate the case land. He was also assured of proper and just compensation for the dwelling house and structure stood over the case land. However, the Petitioner was paid a meagre amount of Rs.24,29,918/- towards compensation under the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Package, which was encashed on 11th October, 2021. 3.2 Being not satisfied with the compensation, the Petitioner submitted a representation to the Collector, Cuttack on 3rd November, 2021. But the Collector, Cuttack-Opposite Party No.3 did not take any action on the said representation for which the Petitioner approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.892 of 2022, which was disposed of vide order dated 23rd February, 2022 with the following direction. “4. Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court directs the Collector, Cuttack (opposite party No.3) to take a decision on the above noted grievance petition under Annexure-3 in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and communicate the result of such exercise to the Petitioner. Page 3 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK Date: 09-Sep-2025 13:48:45 5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.” Pursuant to the aforesaid direction, the impugned order under Annexure-8 has been passed. 4. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Collector, Cuttack sat over the matter as LAR and R Authority (for brevity ‘Authority) and passed the impugned order. Since the Petitioner had filed a representation being not satisfied with the amount of award, the Collector, Cuttack should have referred the matter to the Authority for adjudication. He could not have adjudicated the matter as has been done in the impugned order. 5. Mr. Mishra, learned ASC vehemently objecting to the prayer made by Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner had already received of Rs.24.29,918/- towards the compensation for the unauthorized structure made over the case land which stood recorded in favour of the Energy and Irrigation Departments (Bidyut and Jala Sechana Bibhaga). There is a scale for payment of compensation under the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Package and the Petitioner has been adequately compensated. The amount so deposited since been encashed by the Petitioner, the grievance of the Petitioner may not further be addressed under Section 64 of the Act. As such, the Collector has committed no error in rejecting the representation of the Petitioner. 6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that the Petitioner upon receipt of the compensation amount of Rs.24,29,918/- filed representation for enhancement of the same being not satisfied with the adequacy of compensation awarded. Of course, the Page 4 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK Date: 09-Sep-2025 13:48:45 Petitioner had already encashed the said amount, but encashment of such compensation does not deprive the Petitioner to avail the remedy under Section 64 of the Act. The Collector, Cuttack has committed a gross error in adjudicating the matter with regard to adequacy of the compensation, which is conferred on the LAR and R Authority in a reference under Section 64 of the Act. The scope of Section 64 of the Act does not permit the Collector, Cuttack to adjudicate the adequacy of the compensation. Hence, we have no hesitation to set aside the order dated 16th April, 2022 (Annexure- 8) passed by the Collector, Cuttack-Opposite Party No.3 pursuant to the direction dated 23rd February, 2022 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.892 of 2022. 7. Accordingly, we set aside the same and direct the Collector, Cuttack to refer the matter to LAR and R Authority for adjudication of the adequacy of the compensation received by the Petitioner. 7.1 Since the Petitioner is fighting out litigation to receive adequate compensation, steps for referring the matter to LAR and R Authority, Cuttack shall be taken as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order before the Collector, Cuttack. 7.2 It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case of the Petitioner. 8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (Savitri Ratho) Judge Page 5 of 5 s.s.ssatpathy