Orissa High Court
Ntpc Ltd. vs State Of Odisha And Others on 9 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 32131 OF 2011
NTPC Ltd., Talcher Super Thermal .... Petitioner
Power Station, Angul
Mr. N. Sarkar, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opp. Parties
Mr. K. K. Jena, Advocate
(For Opp. Party Nos.4 to 6)
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 09.03.2023
I.A. No.3881 of 2022
15. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. This is an application for modification of the order dated
23rd July, 2013 passed in this writ petition to disburse the
compensation amount in favour of Opposite Party No.4 instead of
Opposite Party Nos.4 to 6, as directed in the said order.
3. On perusal of the record, it appears that this Court upon
hearing learned counsel for the parties vide order dated 23rd July,
2013 passed the following direction:
"7. The land acquisition proceeding shall commence
from the date of issuance of notice under section 4(1) of
the L.A. Act and the Land Acquisition Officer shall pass
an award under Section 11 of the said Act in respect of
said Ac.0.23 decimals handed over the NTPC-petitioner.
The entire process shall be completed within a period of
three months from today. It is further directed that the
land consisting of Ac.0.23 decimals, which has been
handed over the NTPC-petitioner shall be demarcated by
the Land Acquisition Officer in presence of the NTPC and
opp. Party No.6, who according to Mr. Mishra, will
represent all the plaintiffs. The date of demarcation shall
be notified to both the parties by the Land Acquisition
Officer. To avoid confusion, the Land Acquisition Officer
// 2 //
is further directed to demarcate the balance Ac.0.22
decimals of land also, while will be owned and possessed
by the plaintiffs-Opposite Parties. The award as would be
passed and compensation as would be determined shall
be paid to the opp. Parties 4 to 6 immediately after three
months and, if they so like, they may receive the
compensation with objection, and in such event, reference
may be made under Section 18 of the Act in accordance
with law. The land acquisition proceeding shall be
construed to have been initiated on the requisition of the
NTPC-petitioner and the payment required to be made by
the NTPC-petitioner for the value of the land shall also
be deposited by the NTPC-petitioner if no surplus
amount, out of the amount already deposited by NTPC is
available with the Land Acquisition Officer."
4. On perusal of the record, it appears that the application for
modification of the order has been filed after more than nine years
of the said order without explaining the delay. It further appears
that if the order is allowed to be modified, it will amount to
review of the said order itself. As the order sought to be modified
has been passed upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am
not inclined to entertain the application after a lapse of more than
nine years.
5. In view of the above, I.A. No.3881 of 2022 is dismissed.
Accordingly, I.A. No.15123 of 2021 filed with the same prayer
also stands dismissed.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
W.P.(C) No. 32131 OF 2011
16. 1. This writ petition has been filed with the following
prayer:
"Under the aforesaid facts, circumstances and
contentions, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court
be most graciously pleased to:
// 3 //
(i) admit and allow this writ application; and
(ii) set aside and quash the impugned Annexure-1 and
2 and concurrently hold the same to be without
jurisdiction and declare the same to be non-est
and unsustainable in the eye of law; and
(iii) direct calling for the entire records as in the trial
Court and the Appellate Court for enabling an
efficacious adjudication of the present writ
application;
(iv) stay the operation of the impugned judgment and
order dated 01.12.2006, passed by the Additional
District Judge, Talcher in RFA No.28 of 2004
arising out of the judgment dated 29.07.2004 and
decree dated 11.08.2004 passed by the Learned
Civil Judge (Jr. Dvn.), Talcher in TS No.25 of
2000, pending disposal of the present writ
application; and
(v) pass such other orders/ directions as may be
deemed fit and proper in the bonafide interest of
justice;
And for which act of kindness, the petitioner shall, as in
duty bound, ever pray"
2. On perusal of the record, it appears that vide order dated
19th February, 2013, this Court passed the following order:
"Pursuant to the previous order, learned counsel
for the State has obtained written instruction that the
value of land would be around Rs.3,40,000/- per acre.
Learned counsel for the State is directed to file an
affidavit as to what amount would be payable taking the
rate at Rs.3,40,000/- per acre along with solatium and
additional market value and interest from the date of
filing of the suit i.e. from the year 2000. Learned counsel
for the State is also directed to obtain instruction as to
whether the amount as calculated can be paid to the
opposite parties-land owner from the amount which is
lying with them being deposited by the petitioner.
Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner is also
directed to obtain instruction as to whether the petitioner
will be agreeable for settling the dispute for all times to
come by paying the amount around Rs.7,00,000/- so as to
bring an end to the litigation.
It is made clear that in the event the matter is
settled, the opposite parties 4 to 6-land owner shall not
claim any benefit under the Rehabilitation Assistance
Scheme in respect of the suit land.
// 4 //
Put up this matter on 5.3.2013 in my Chamber at
1.40 P.M.
A copy of this order be handed over to the learned
counsel for the State as well as Mr. Das, learned counsel
for the petitioner."
2. In view of the orders dated 19th February, 2013 and 23rd
July, 2013, passed by this Court in the writ petition, nothing
remains to be adjudicated in this writ petition itself.
3. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of in
terms of orders dated 19th February, 2013 and 23rd July, 2013.
4. Thus, the impugned judgment dated 1st December, 2006
(Annexure-1) passed by learned Additional District Judge,
Dhenkanal in RFA No.28 of 2004 and judgment and decree
dated 29th July, 2004 and 11th August, 2004 (Annexure-2)
respectively passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division),
Talcher in T.S. No.25 of 2000 gets merged with the orders
dated 19th July, 2013 and 23rd July, 2013 passed in this case.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
ms Judge
