The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Mahana Bhue W.P.(C) No. 14385 of 2025 …. Petitioner Mr. Akshaya Kumar Sahoo, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Odisha and Others 2. Director (R & R) & Ex-Officio, Additional Secretary to Government, Deptt. Of Water Resources, Orissa, Bhubaneswar 3. Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Balangir 4. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Lower Suktel Irrigation Project, Balangir ….
Legal Reasoning
Opposite Parties Mr. Swayambhu Mishra, ASC Order No. 02. CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Decision
ORDER 13.11.2025 This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 1. 2. The Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 16th January, 2025 (Annexure-5) passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Lower Suktel Irrigation Project, Balangir rejecting his application under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for brevity, ‘the Act’). 3. Mr. A.K. Sahoo, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that being not satisfied with the award passed under the Act, the Petitioner received the compensation amount on protest and filed an application under Section 64 of the Act on 18th October, 2023. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Lower Suktel Irrigation Project, Balangir rejected the said application on the sole ground Page 1 of 4 of limitation holding that the application was filed beyond the statutory period. It is his submission that the Special Land Acquisition Officer did not take into consideration the second proviso under Section 64 (2) of the Act while dealing with the application. Hence, he prays for setting aside the impugned order to remit the matter to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Lower Suktel Irrigation Project, Balangir for fresh consideration of his application filed under Section 64 of Act providing him an opportunity of hearing and to file an application explaining the delay. 4. Mr. Swayambhu Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel on instruction submits that the award under the Act was passed on 9th April, 2023 and notice under Section 21 of the Act was published on 31st March, 2023. The Petitioner received the awarded amount on 2nd June, 2023. No protest was raised at the time of receiving the compensation. The application under Section 64 of the Act was filed only on 18th October, 2023 i.e. four months after receiving the award. No explanation of delay was also offered in the application under Section 64 of the Act. Thus, the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Lower Suktel Irrigation Project, Balangir had no occasion to condone the delay and entertain the application under Section 64 of the Act. He, therefore, submits that the impugned order does not suffer any infirmity. 5. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that the Petitioner received the award on 2nd June, 2023. It is a fact that the Petitioner had not raised any protest at the time of receiving the compensation, but the application under Section 64 of the Act was filed on 18th March, 2023 to refer the matter to Page 2 of 4 the Authority for enhancement of compensation. 6. Section 64 (2) of the Act reads as under:- “Section 64 (2) (2)The application shall state the grounds on which objection to the award is taken: Provided that every such application shall be made- (a) if the person making it was present or represented before the Collector at the time when he made his award, within six weeks from the date of the Collector's award, (b) in other cases, within six weeks of the receipt of the notice from the Collector under section 21, or within six months from the date of the Collector's award, whichever period shall first expire: Provided further that the Collector may entertain an application after the expiry of the said period, within a further period of one year, if he is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing it within the period specified in the first proviso.” 7. Second proviso to Section 64 (2) of the Act clearly provides that the Collector has the power to condone the delay in filing the application under Section 64 of the Act upto one year subject to satisfactory explanation. In the instant case, no such explanation was offered. Thus, the Special Land Acquisition Officer had probably no occasion to condone the delay, if any. Since the Act is a benevolent statute and the Petitioner has lost his valuable property for acquisition, he should be given an opportunity to explain the delay in filing the petition for condonation of delay. 8. It also appears that the Special Land Acquisition Officer has not taken into consideration the second proviso to Section 64 (2) of the Act. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 16th January, 2025 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Lower Suktel Irrigation Project, Page 3 of 4 Balangir for fresh adjudication of the application under Section 64 (1) of the Act providing an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner and to file an application explaining the delay in filing the application under Section 64 of the Act. 9. In order to avoid delay, the Petitioner is directed to appear before the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Lower Suktel Irrigation Project, Balangir on 28th November, 2025 along with certified copy of this order to receive further instruction in the matter. The petition explaining the delay in filing the petition under Section 64 of the Act shall be filed within a period of two weeks from the date of first appearance of the Petitioner. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Lower Suktel Irrigation Project, Balangir shall do well to consider the application under Section 64 of the Act as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of first appearance of the Petitioner and communicate the result thereof to the Petitioner forthwith. 10. It is also directed that the Petitioner shall cooperate with Special Land Acquisition Officer, Lower Suktel Irrigation Project, Balangir for early disposal of the application under Section 64 of the Act. 11. With aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. 12. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed puspa Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 17-Nov-2025 11:21:55 (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (Savitri Ratho) Judge Page 4 of 4