[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Jagabandhu Panda vs State Of Odisha on 16 January, 2026
Author: K.R. Mohapatra
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO
Designation: SENIOR STENOGRAPHER
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 19-Jan-2026 13:14:47
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 19208 OF 2018
(An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India)
*****
1. Jagabandhu Panda
2. Swadhin Kumar Panda
3. Dhurbasena Panda
4. Dipak Kumar Panda
...... Petitioners
-Versus-
1. State of Odisha, represented through
Its secretary Revenue and Disaster
Management Dept., Khurda
2. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate,
Keonjhar
3. The Chief Construction Engineer,
Anandapur Barrage Project, Salapda
4. The Zone Officer, Land Acquisition,
Anandapur Barrage Project, Salapada
5. The Tahasildar, Ghasipura
....... Opp. Parties
Advocates appeared:
For Petitioners : Mr. Soubhagya Kumar Dash
Advocate
For Opp. Parties : Mr. Ajodhya Ranjan Dash,
Additional Government Advocate
CORAM :
MR. JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
------------------------------------------------
Heard and disposed of on 16.01.2026
----------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
By the Bench;
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
Designation: SENIOR STENOGRAPHER
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 19-Jan-2026 13:14:47
// 2 //
2. The Petitioners in this writ petition pray for a direction
to set aside the action taken by the Opposite Parties in
demolishing their houses and to pay them compensation under
the Odisha Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy, 2006 (for
brevity 'R & R Policy').
3. Mr. Dash, learned counsel submits that the Petitioners
are the homestead less persons and encroaching upon the
Government land, they had constructed their residential
houses, which was utilized for construction of Anandapur
Barrage Project, Salapada in the district of Keonjhar. It is his
submission that the Petitioners being the landless and
homestead less persons, had come to Anandapur for their
livelihood. They had occupied government land and
constructed their residential houses thereon and were residing
with their family members. Pursuant to a decision taken for
construction of Anandapur Barrage, the lands occupied by the
Petitioners were required to be utilized for the said project.
Vide Letter No.4985 dated 18th December, 2015 (Annexure-7),
the Tahasildar, Ghasipura wrote to the Executive Engineer,
Anandapur Barrage Division, Anandapur that "Sri
Jagabandhu Panda and others are originally authenticated
who are homesteadless persons as they were encroached the
Govt. land at Anandapur Barrage since 20/30 years to above
as reported by concerned R.I. of this Tahasil." Pursuant to the
said letter, the Executive Engineer, Anandapur Barrage
Division, Salapada wrote to the Zone Officer (LA), Anandapur
Designation: SENIOR STENOGRAPHER
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 19-Jan-2026 13:14:47
// 3 //
Barrage Project, Salapada vide letter No.225 dated 21st
January, 2016 (Annexure-8), requesting him to intimate as to
whether the Petitioners are eligible for compensation under the
R & R Policy. Again vide Letter No.5355 dated 16th
September, 2016 (Annexure-9), the Chief Construction
Engineer, Anandapur Barrage Project, Salapada wrote to the
Special Land Acquisition Officer, Anandapur Barrage Project,
Salapada to intimate him as to whether the Petitioners are
eligible for compensation under the R & R Policy. But,
without responding to the same, the Tahasildar, Ghasipura
issued notice for eviction. Subsequently, the residential houses
of the Petitioners were demolished and they were evicted.
Referring to the letter of the Executive Engineer, Anandapur
Barrage Project, Salapada communicated to the Tahasildar,
Ghasipura on 2nd December, 2025 under Annexure-6, Mr.
Dash, learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that if the
encroacher is a homestead less person and the encroachment
found to be objectionable, he will be entitled to the cost of
structure only, as per the provisions of the R & R Policy.
Further, the Zone Officer (LA), Anandapur Barrage Project,
Salapada communicated the Sub-Collector, Anandapur vide
letter dated 3rd June, 2015 (Annexure-2) as under:
"Sir,
In enclosing herewith the Xerox copy of letter
No.4692 dt. 05.02.2004 of Govt. of Odisha in DOWR
and clause (b) of rule -9 of Odisha, Resettlement and
Rehabilitation Policy, 2006, I am to inform you that an
encroacher is not entitled to compensation for the
structure standing over the lands recorded under
Govt-Khata.
Designation: SENIOR STENOGRAPHER
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 19-Jan-2026 13:14:47
// 4 //
However, if the encroacher is a homestead less
person and the encroachment is found to be
objectionable, he will be entitled to the cost of
structure only as per the provision of O.R.R. Policy,
2006."
3.1. Since the lands encroached by the Petitioners were
objectionable, they are entitled to the cost of the structure, as
they are homestead less persons. He, therefore, prayed for a
direction to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Anandapur
Barrage Project, Salapada to pay the Petitioners adequate
compensation for the structures, they had made over the
encroached land.
4. Mr. Dash, learned Additional Government Advocate
referring to the counter affidavit of the Collector-cum-District
Magistrate, Keonjhar-Opposite Party No.2 and the Tahasildar,
Ghasipura-Opposite Party No.5 submitted that the writ petition
suffers from suppression of material facts. The Petitioners are
neither the landless nor homestead less persons. The Petitioner
Nos.2 and 4 are the sons of Petitioner No.1. They are claiming
through their father, Petitioner No.1. All the Petitioners have
homestead land at their native villages. He also referred to the
Record of Right (RoR) standing in the name of the Petitioner
No.1. The RoR of Petitioner No.1 clearly indicates that Sri
Jagabandhu Panda has a piece of homestead land over Plot
No.337/803 to an extent of Ac.0.05 decimals of Khata
No.153/89 at village Kumunia under Ghasipura Tahasil in the
district of Keonjhar. Likewise, the Petitioner No.3 is the
grandson of Bhajahari Panda, who had homestead land of
Designation: SENIOR STENOGRAPHER
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 19-Jan-2026 13:14:47
// 5 //
Ac.0.34 decimals at village Khaliamenta under Ghasipura
Tahasil in the district of Keonjhar. These material facts were
suppressed by the Petitioners. Thus, the writ petition is liable
to be dismissed for suppression of material facts as well as on
merit.
5. Taking note of the submissions made by learned
counsel for the parties, this Court finds that the Petitioner No.1
has both agricultural and homestead land standing in his name.
Further the Petitioner No.3, who is the grandson of Bhajahari
Panda, has also homestead land at Village Khaliamenta. These
material facts were suppressed by the Petitioners in this writ
petition. Thus, the Petitioners being not homestead less
persons they are not entitled to the cost of construction over
the encroached land.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition being devoid of any
merit stands dismissed. In the facts and circumstances, there
shall be no order as to costs.
Urgent certified copy of this judgment be granted on
proper application.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(S.K. Mishra)
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack,
Dated 16th January, 2026/Madhusmita
