Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Bhubaneswar v. State of Odisha and others), relevant paragraphs of which are quoted hereunder
Case Details
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 10-Dec-2025 16:16:36 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 32482 OF 2025 Haridaspur-Paradip Railway Company Limited, Khurda …. Petitioner Mr. Prabin Das, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Odisha 2. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Kendrapara …. Opp. Parties 3. The Chief Engineer (Construction), Khurda 4. Bijaya Bharat Mohapatra, Managing Director, Bijaya Bharat Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Paradeep
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Siba Narayan Biswal, Additional Standing Counsel (For Opp. Party Nos.1 & 2) Mr. Alok Kumar Mohanty, Senior Panel Counsel (For Opp. Party No.3) CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO Order No.
Decision
ORDER 10.12.2025 2. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. The Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the judgment dated 5th April, 2025 (Annexure-1) passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Kujang, Jagatsinghpur in L.A.R. Case No.16 of 2015. 3. Mr. Das, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner being a beneficiary of land acquisition and a person Page 1 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 10-Dec-2025 16:16:36 interested was not served with any notice before passing of the award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity “the Act”) or during adjudication of the reference under Section 18 of the Act being L.A.R. Case No.16 of 2015. It is his submission that by virtue of the impugned judgment under Annexure-1, the award passed under Section 11 of the Act was enhanced unreasonably. Hence, the Petitioner has a say in the matter. It is, however, submitted that the judgment passed in L.A.R. Case No.16 of 2015 was not challenged by either parties to the said reference. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that this case may be disposed of in the light of order dated 18th June, 2024 passed in W.P.(C) No.13949 of 2024 (Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. State of Odisha and others), relevant paragraphs of which are quoted hereunder; “6. A statutory appeal under Section 54 of the Act lies against an award under Section 18 of the Act, but at the same time, a writ petition is maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution against determination of the amount of compensation by the Land Acquisition Collector or by the Reference Court as held in U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad vs. Gyan Devi (Dead) by L.Rs. and Ors., AIR 1995 SC 725 and in Gregory Patrao and others vs. Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Limited and others; (2022) 10 SCC 461. In the instant case, the petitioner is entitled to an opportunity of hearing for just adjudication of the reference under Section 18 of the Act. 7. In that view of the matter without delving into technicalities with regard to maintainability of the writ petition, we set aside the impugned award under Annexure-1 and remit the matter to the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kamakhyanagar for de novo adjudication of the L.A. Misc. Case No.184 of 2021 giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties including the Page 2 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 10-Dec-2025 16:16:36 petitioner. It is further directed that the learned Senior to Civil Judge, Kamakhyanagar shall do well adjudicate the reference afresh as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. 8. Parties are directed to cooperate for early disposal of the reference. 9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, Writ Petition is disposed of.” 5. He further submits that although the judgment passed under Section 18 of the Act is appealable under Section 54 of the Act, but a writ petition is maintainable as held in the aforesaid order relying upon the decision in the cases of U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad vs. Gyan Devi (Dead) By L.Rs. And Ors.: AIR 1995 SC 725 and Gregory Patrao and others vs. Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Limited and others; (2022) 10 SCC 461. 6. He, therefore, prays for setting aside the impugned judgment under Annexure-1 and to remit the matter to the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kujang, Jagatsinghpur for fresh adjudication of the reference under Section 18 of the Act, i.e. L.A.R. Case No.16 of 2015 providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned including the Petitioner. 7. This matter was listed on 26th November, 2025 when this Court directed the learned State Counsel to take instruction as to whether the ratio in the case of Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Bhubaneswar (supra) is applicable to the instant case or not. 8. On verification, Mr. Biswal, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that the ratio in the case of Angul Sukinda Page 3 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 10-Dec-2025 16:16:36 Railway Ltd., Bhubaneswar (supra) is squarely applicable to the instant case. 9. In that view of the matter, this Court without delving further into the contentions raised by learned counsel for the Parties on merit of Judgment under Amnnexure-1, disposes of the writ petition in the light of the decision in the case of Angul Sukinda Railway Ltd., Bhubaneswar (supra). 10. As the Petitioner is the beneficiary of land acquisition and a person interested and was not provided with any opportunity of hearing during adjudication of the reference under Section 18 of the Act, the impugned judgment under Annexure-1 is set aside and the matter is remitted to learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kujang, Jagatsinghpur to adjudicate L.A.R. Case No.16 of 2015 (under Section 18 of the Act) afresh as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of service of notice on the parties, providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, including the Petitioner. Learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kujang, Jagatsinghpur shall act upon production of certified copy of this order. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. ms (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (Savitri Ratho) Judge Page 4 of 4