Orissa High Court
Special Land Acquisition Officer vs Murari Charan Mishra on 23 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
LAA No.11 of 2022
Special Land Acquisition Officer, ..... Appellant
Talcher
Mr. G. Rout, ASC
Vs.
Murari Charan Mishra ..... Respondent
Mr. S. Pradhan, Adv.
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
ORDER
23.11.2022
Order No. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
03.
2. Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant and learned Counsel for
the Respondent.
3. Apart from other grounds, learned Counsel for the Appellant,
relying on the judgment of the coordinate Bench in case of Special
L.A. Officer, Lanjigarh Road-Junagarh Rail Link Project,
Bhawanipatna, Kalahandi vs. Prabhabati Majhi and others,
reported in 2006 (II) OLR 720, submits that in view of not impleading
the "Requiring Body" as a Party to the proceeding, who has a right to
contest the claim of the claimants relating to the valuation of the land in
the reference proceeding, the impugned Order is bad and liable to be set
aside. Learned Counsel for the Appellant further submits that
Department of Railways, being the "person interested" in terms of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894, ought to have been noticed by the referral
court to participate in the said proceeding.
4. In response to the said argument advanced by the learned
Counsel for the Appellant, learned Counsel for the Respondent submits
that the Railways, being the Requiring Body as defined under Section
3(zd) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, cannot be
brought under the definition "person interested" and it was obligatory
on the part of the referral court to notice the Requiring Body and not
the present Respondent.
5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that in terms of the
Provisions enshrined under Sections 64, 65 and 66 of the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation
and Resettlement Act, 2013, it was obligatory on the part of the
Authority concerned to notice all persons interested inviting Objection,
including the Requiring Body i.e. Railways and hence, the impugned
judgment dated 15.04.2021 is bad and liable to be set aside on that
score alone.
6. Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that he has already
filed I.A. No.214 of 2022 praying therein to release of some percentage
of awarded amount with interest in favour of the Respondent, whereas
I.A. No.176/2022 has been filed by the State-Appellant with a prayer to
stay further proceeding in Execution Case No.01 of 2021 pending in the
file of learned Presiding Officer, LAR & R Authority (ND), Sambalpur,
till disposal of the Appeal.
7. Learned Counsel for the Parties wants some time to file their
respective Objections to the said I.As., which is allowed.
8. Matter be listed in the week commencing from 19.12.2022 under
the heading "For Orders".
9 Objections to the I.As. be filed by the Parties in the meantime
after serving copy of the same on the other side.
10. Learned Counsel for the Appellant is permitted to move
application for an adjournment in Execution Case No.01 of 2022 in
view of pendency of the present Appeal.
11. Office is directed to call for the Trial Court Record in Land
Acquisition Case No.01 of 2020.
padma (S.K. MISHRA)
JUDGE
padma
