Pravat Kumar Sahoo vs Land Acquisition Collector
2023 Latest Caselaw 1028 Ori

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                               L.A.A No.71 of 2022

                 Pravat Kumar Sahoo                 ....            Appellant

                                    Mr. B.P. Dhal,
                                    Advocate

                                         -versus-
                 Land Acquisition Collector- ....       Respondents
                 cum-Zone Officer, Zone-IV,
                 Rengali Right Canal
                 System, Dhenkanal &
                 another
                                 Mr. G. Rout,
                                 Additional Standing Counsel

                  CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
                                     ORDER

Order No. 31.01.2023

05. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that defect No.9 has already been removed since 18th January, 2023, which is on record. However, as the requisites were filed without postal cover and postal fee, it has been pointed out by the Office that defect No.9 has not been removed.

3. In view of the submission made by the learned Counsel for the Appellant so also filing of requisites on 18.01.2023, the said noting made by the Office is ignored.

3. Heard Mr. Dhal, learned Counsel for the Appellant, so also Mr. G.N. Rout, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Respondents.

4. Mr. Dhal submits that though in L.A. Case No.130 of 2020, the Court below held that the Petitioner, who is the brother of the present Appellant, is entitled to get compensation @ Rs.25,000/- per decimal for the acquired and though the Mouza and Kissam of the land of the present Appellant was same, his application for enhancement of compensation under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 was erroneously and illegally rejected by the Court below. Mr. Dhal files a copy of the said Judgment dated 24.12.2021 passed in L.A. Case No.130 of 2020 after serving copy of the same on the learned Counsel for the State, which be kept on record.

5. Admit.

6. Call for the L.C.R.

7. Since the learned Counsel for the State has already rendered appearance for the Respondents and copy of the Memorandum of Appeal has already ban served on him, no notice be issued to the Respondents.

8. Matter be listed under the heading "For Hearing" immediately after receipt of L.C.R.

Prasant                                               (S. K. MISHRA)
                                                          JUDGE