[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Jayashree Kumar Devi And Others vs Union Of India And Others .... Opp. ... on 6 March, 2026
Author: K.R. Mohapatra
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 07-Mar-2026 17:01:08
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) NO. 27358 OF 2025
Jayashree Kumar Devi and others .... Petitioners
Mr. Haripada Mohanty, Advocate
-versus-
Union of India and others .... Opp. Parties
Mr. Swayambhu Mishra,
Additional Standing Counsel
(For Opposite Party No.4)
Miss Shradhanjali Sahoo, Advocate
(For Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2)
Mr. Pranab Ranjan Chhatoi, Advocate
(For Opposite Party No.5)
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 05.03.2026
03. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Petitioners in this Writ Petition pray for a direction to the
Special Land Acquisition Officer (NH)-cum-Competent Authority,
Sambalpur for disposal of their representation dated 4th September,
2025 (Annexure-7) and to disburse adequate compensation for
acquisition of the land situated nearby NH-42/55.
3. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that
Plot Nos.3489/4199 and 3404/4200 of Khata No.744 in mouza
Rampur under Rairakhol tahasil in the district of Sambalpur (for
short, 'the case land') purchased by the Petitioners was acquired for
expansion of NH-42/55. Compensation under Section 3-G of the
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 07-Mar-2026 17:01:08
National Highways Act, 1956 was awarded in favour of Rajeswari
Singh - Opposite Party No.5, the recorded tenant. Prior to
publication of notification under Section 3-A of the Act, Petitioners
had purchased the case land from the father of the Opposite Party
No.5. Thus, compensation should have been awarded in their favour.
Ventilating their grievance, the Petitioners have filed a
representation before the competent Authority under Land
Acquisition (NH)-Opposite party No.3 to release the compensation
in their favour. The competent Authority, without referring the
matter to the principal Civil Court for adjudication under Section 3-
H (4) of the Act is sitting over the matter. Hence, this Writ Petition
has been filed.
4. Mr. Chhatoi, learned counsel for Opposite Party No.5 submits
that Petitioners had never purchased land from father of Opposite
Party No.5. The case land was recorded in the name of father of
Opposite Party No.5 and after his death, her name was recorded as
his legal heir. He, therefore, submits that the compensation has
rightly been awarded in favour of Opposite Party No.5.
5. Miss Sahoo, learned counsel for National Highways submits
that she has no definite instruction in the matter.
6. Taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel
for the parties, this Court finds that there is a genuine dispute with
regard to person in whose favour compensation should be released.
Thus, the instant case squarely comes under the provisions of Section
3-H (4) of the Act. Thus, the competent Authority should refer the
matter to principal Civil Court under Section 3-H (4) of the Act.
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 07-Mar-2026 17:01:08
7. In that view of the matter, this Court, without expressing any
opinion on merit of the submissions of either of learned counsel for
the parties, disposes of the Writ Petition with a direction to the
competent Authority, Land Acquisition (NH), Sambalpur-Opposite
Party No.3 to refer the matter to competent Civil Court for
adjudication of the dispute under Section 3-H (4) of the Act
forthwith.
Issue urgent certified copy of the order on proper application.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(S.K Mishra)
s.s.satpathy Judge
