Hadibandhu Sahu and another ….. Union of India and others v. …
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 34492 of 2022 Hadibandhu Sahu and another ….. Union of India and others Vs. ….. Petitioners Mr. S.C. Dash, Advocate Opposite Parties
Legal Reasoning
Mr. P.K. Parhi, DSGI along with Mr. B. Maharana, CGC, Mr. S.N. Nayak, ASC & Mr. U.C. Mohanty, Advocate (NHAI) CORAM: DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
Decision
ORDER 16.08.2023 Order No. 04. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. S.C. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. P.K. Parhi, learned DSGI along with Mr. B. Maharana, learned Central Government Counsel; Mr. S.N. Nayak, learned Additional Standing Counsel; and Mr. U.C. Mohanty, learned counsel for NHAI. 3. The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking to quash the letter dated 31.10.2022 by which the competent authority has passed an order stating therein that petitioner no.2 is not entitled to get compensation for the land in question which has been acquired. The petitioners have also challenged the steps taken for demolition of the construction made over the land in question and seek direction to opposite parties no. 2 to 6 to release the awarded compensation amount over plot No. 763/2070, Khata No. 570/52 for an area of Ac 0.180 dec as determined/awarded under Annexure-12 series and communicated by opposite party no.4 to opposite party no.3 in favour of the petitioners along with interest accrued thereon from the Page 1 of 4 date of notification till the date of payment as per the statutory provision. 4. Mr. S.C. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that without acquiring the land and paying compensation thereof, steps are being taken for demolition of the structure standing over the land in question. Therefore, the letter under Annexure-1 cannot be sustained in the eye of law. It is further contended that the land in question has been transferred in favour of the husband of petitioner no.2 in the year 2013, therefore, any proceeding which has been initiated against petitioner no.2 should have been initiated against her husband, i.e. petitioner no.1. But without doing so and without giving any compensation, steps are going to be taken for acquisition of the land and demolition of the structure standing thereof, which is not legally tenable. 5. In response to the notice, Mr. U.C. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for NHAI contended that counter affidavit has already been filed by opposite parties 2, 3, 4 and 6, wherein they have stated that petitioner No. 1-Hadibandhu Sahu, S/o-Raghunath Sahu of Village- Gopalprasad, P.O- Kuhudi, P.S- Tangi, Dist- Khurda and petitioner no.2- Smt. Sabita Sahu @ Chhabi Sahu, W/o- Hadibandhu Sahu, At/P.O/P.S- Tangi, Dist- Khurda, both the writ petitioners are the husband and wife. Initially the L.A. award and total compensation amount for Rs.59,50,328/- in L.A Case No. 1354/33/2004 had been passed u/s 3G of the NH Act, 1956 as revealed from Annexure-12 of the writ petition by opposite party no. 5, the then LAO & CA, Nayagarh of NH-16 and subsequently, when the CALA Cell, Nayagarh was closed, the same has been transferred and now functioning under opposite party No. 6 i.e. LAO & CA, NH-16, Bhubaneswar in Plot No. C/72, 1st Floor, HIG BDA Duplex Page 2 of 4 Colony, Baramunda, w.e.f. 31.10.2022. In fact, the impugned order under Annexure-1 dated 31.10.2012 has been passed in compliance to the direction of this Court dated 17.10.2022 passed in W.P.(C) No. 25195 of 2022 wherein the wife of petitioner no. 1 was the writ petitioner. But the petitioners have filed the present writ petition jointly seeking to quash the letter dated 31.10.2022 issued by the Competent Authority, Land Acquisition, Nayagarh and prayed for direction to opposite party nos. 2 to 6 to release the awarded compensation amount and structure standing over Plot No. 763/2070, Khata No. 570/52 for an area of Ac 0.180 dec of Mouza-Nizigada Kuhudi in their favour. In view of such position, unless the order passed under Annexure-1 rejecting the claim of the petitioner is set aside, the benefit cannot be extended to the petitioners. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the record, it appears the opposite party no.5 had passed the order dated 31.10.2022 under Annexure-1 in compliance to the direction issued by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 25195 of 2022 disposed of on 17.10.2022. By the time the order under Annexure-1 was passed, the file has already been taken over by opposite party no.6. Thus, opposite party no.5 was not aware of the status of the case in question, but in compliance of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 25195 of 2022, he passed the order dated 31.10.2022 under Annexure-1. In that view of the matter and keeping in view the averments made in the counter affidavit as stated above, the order dated 31.10.2022 under Annexure-1 passed by opposite party no.5 cannot be sustained in the eye of law and the same is liable to be quashed and is hereby quashed. 7. Resultantly the petitioners are directed to file necessary application jointly before opposite party no.6, who on receipt of the Page 3 of 4 same shall take necessary step for disbursement of the compensation amount as has already been determined by the authority. Needless to say, if such application is filed within a period of fifteen (15) days from today, opposite party no.6 shall act upon the same and take necessary step for disbursement of the compensation amount within a period of three months thereafter, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and taking into consideration the documents available under Annexures-12 series and Annexures-14, 15, 16 and 17 of the writ petition. Till a decision is taken by the authority, there shall be no demolition of the structure in question. 8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE Arun (M.S. RAMAN) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ARUN KUMAR MISHRA Designation: ADR-cum-Addl. Principal Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 17-Aug-2023 14:45:07 Page 4 of 4