Orissa High Court
State Of Odisha vs Pitabash Khatua & Others on 31 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
L.A.A. No.99 of 2013
State of Odisha ....... Appellant
-Versus-
Pitabash Khatua & others ....... Respondents
For Appellant : Mr. Nikhil Pratap,
Addl. Standing Counsel
For Respondents : Mr. M.K. Panda,
Advocate
----------------------------
P R E S E N T:
MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of Hearing: 16.10.2023 Date of Judgment: 31.10.2023
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S.K. Mishra, J. The present Appeal has been preferred against the
Judgment dated 19.01.2012 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.
Division), Kamakhyanagar in L.A. Misc. Case No.107 of 2010, vide
which the Court below enhanced the compensation for acquiring
various kind of trees based on Judgment passed in L.A. Misc. Case
No.42 of 2006 so also following the principle of parity as detailed in
Paragraph-9.6 of the impugned Judgment.
2. The brief background facts which lead to filing of the
present Appeal under Section-54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
is, an area of Ac.1.28 decimals of Sarada-III Kisam of land
appertaining to Plot No.278/1896 in Mouza Baghua under
Kamakhyanagar P.S. in the District of Dhenkanal belonging to the
Respondents was acquired by the State Government under Section
4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in short, 'the Act' vide
Gazette Notification dated 06.08.1998, which was published on
02.09.1998 for the purpose of Rengali Irrigation Project. Pursuant
to the same, an enquiry was conducted under Section-11 of the
Act. After taking into consideration all contemporaneous materials
pertaining to the acquired land and its vicinity, compensation
payable for the acquired land was determined @ Rs.50,000/- per
acre. In total the Respondents were paid a sum of Rs.1,38,275/-
towards compensation for acquiring the land, including
Rs.22,497/- towards the trees standing over the acquired land and
Rs.11,408/- towards the tank. However, the Respondents received
the said amount under protest. Thereafter, in a reference made
under Section-18 of the Act, which was registered as L.A. Misc.
Case No.107 of 2010, the referral Court vide Judgment/Award
dated 19.01.2012 ,relying on an earlier award of the referral Court
under Ext.2, enhanced the quantum of compensation in respect of
the trees standing over the acquired land i.e. @ Rs.200/- towards
each Kendu tree, @ Rs.600/- towards each Kaju tree, @ Rs.1000/-
towards each Sunari tree and @ Rs.1000/- towards each Khira tree
along with other statutory benefits available under the Act. Hence,
this Appeal.
3. Though this Appeal has been preferred on various
grounds as detailed in Memorandum of Appeal, Mr. Pratap, learned
Additional Standing Counsel for the State/Appellant confined his
argument to Ground Nos.'E & F' and submitted that the impugned
Award is bad as the referral Court enhanced the rate of
compensation of trees in absence of any cogent evidence to
substantiate the said claim for enhancement of the value of the
trees and the same was exorbitantly enhanced relying on an earlier
Award passed by the referral Court marked as Ext.2.
4. In response to the said argument advanced by Mr.
Pratap, Mr. Panda, learned Counsel for the Respondents, drawing
attention of this Court to various paragraphs of the impugned
Judgment/Award submitted that the referral Court rightly
enhanced the compensation amount with regard to trees on the
basis of Award rendered in L.A. Misc. Case No.42 of 2006, as the
L.A. Collector determined the valuation of varieties of trees on the
basis of the approved price as on 14.07.1975, which were the rates
23 years prior to the date of Notification dated 08.01.1998 made
under Section 4(1) of the Act. Mr. Panda further submitted that to
demonstrate such perversity before the referral Court, the said
document was exhibited from the side of the present Respondents
as Ext.6. He further submitted that in L.A. Misc. Case No.104 of
2010, relying on the Judgment passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.42 of
2006 (Ext.2), the referral Court enhanced the compensation for
various kinds of trees such as Kendu @ Rs.200/- per tree, Mango
@ Rs.600/- per tree, Maniga (Sajana) @ R.500/- per tree, Chara @
Rs.400/- per tree and Kalicha @ Rs.300/- per tree. Being aggrieved
by the said award passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.104 of 2010, the
State preferred L.A.A. No.120 of 2013, which was dismissed on
09.09.2017 in the National Lok Adalat in absence of the
Respondent in the said Appeal, as the learned Counsel for the
State/Appellant in presence of the Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Rengali Left Canal, made a submission that the impugned Award
in the said Appeal has already been satisfied and nothing remains
to be decided in the said Appeal.
5. By filing a comparative chart to demonstrate before
this Court that the issue involved in the present Appeal is identical
to the issues in L.A. Misc. Case Nos.104, 106 & 107 of 2010, Mr.
Panda further submitted that in all the said Misc. Cases, the
notification and villages are same, whereas the plots on which the
said trees were standing, are adjacent plots. Relying on the said
comparative chart, Mr. Panda further submitted that in L.A. Misc.
Case No.106 of 2010, in identical situation, the compensation
amount pertaining to Kendu tree, Kaju tree, Aswath tree and
Mango tree were enhanced by the referral Court. However, the said
Award was worked out by the State/Appellant without preferring
an Appeal against the award passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.106 of
2010. Mr. Panda also submitted that the species of trees dealt by
the referral Court in the Awards passed in L.A. Misc. Case Nos.104,
106 & 107 of 2010, covers almost all the species of trees involved
in the present appeal. The said submission made by Mr. Panda is
not disputed by the learned Counsel for the State/Appellant.
6. Since neither the Counsel for the State/Appellant nor
Mr. Panda, learned Counsel for the Respondents had copy of the
order passed in L.A.A. No.120 of 2013, the record of the said
Appeal being called for, it is ascertained that on 09.09.2017, the
following order was passed by the Lok Adalata:
"This case is taken up today in the National
Lok Adalat.
Mr. J. Patra, learned counsel for the
appellant along with Sri Nigamananda Panda,
Special Land Acquisition Officer, Rengali Left Canal
are present.
None appears for the respondent when the
matter is called.
Mr. Patra submits that the award
passed has already been satisfied and nothing
remains to be decided in this appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal stands
dismissed.
Registry is directed to intimate all
concerned."
(Emphasis Supplied)
7. That apart, the L.C.R. being called for, it is
ascertained that in Judgment dated 25.10.2011 passed in
L.A. Misc. Case No.104 of 2010, which was marked as Ext-3
without any objection, the referral Court enhanced the rate of
trees, as has been done in the impugned award in this
Appeal, with an observation that the determination of the L.A.
Collector with regard to valuation of variety of trees being
based on approved price as on 14.07.1975, which was
marked as Ext.6 in the said case, is perverse and distorted
one. On further examination of the L.C.R., it is found that the
same Working Sheet marked as Ext.6 in L.A. Misc. Case
No.104 of 2010, has been marked as Ext.8 in L.A. Misc. Case
No.107 of 2010 and letter of the Divisional Forest Officer,
Deogarh Division, which was marked as Ext.9 in L.A. Misc.
Case No.107 of 2010, is dated 31.01.1975, based on which the
L.A. Collector passed a perverse order with regard to valuation
of various kinds of tree as detailed above.
8. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that
there is no perversity in the impugned Judgment dated
19.01.2012 passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.107 of 2010.
Accordingly, the Appeal stands dismissed.
As is ascertained from the order sheet of the case
record, pursuant to order dated 04.09.2014 passed in Misc.
Case No.199 of 2013, an amount of Rs.11,86,728/- was
deposited by the State/Appellant followed by a further
amount of Rs.2,00,000/- before the Court below in terms of
order dated 21.11.2014 passed in Misc. Case No.191 of 2014.
Hence, the entire amount with interest so also with all
permissible statutory benefits, as ordered vide Judgment
dated 19.01.2012 passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.107 of 2010,
be worked out at the earliest. After deducting the amount
already deposited before the referral Court as indicated above,
the rest decreetal amount in terms of the said Judgment
dated 19.01.2012 in L.A. Misc. Case No.107 of 2010 be
deposited before the referral Court within a period of six
weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of this
Judgment. On being so deposited, the entire amount be
disbursed in favour of the present Respondents within two
weeks thereafter.
...................................
S.K. MISHRA, J.
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
The 31st October, 2023/Prasant
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR PRADHAN
Designation: Secretary
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 02-Nov-2023 16:50:25
