Thursday, 07, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Rabindra Kumar Behera vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opp. ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2022 Ori

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2022 Ori
Judgement Date : 7 March, 2026

[Cites 11, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Rabindra Kumar Behera vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opp. ... on 7 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 17:18:34



                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                          W.P.(C) No.3594 OF 2026
                               Rabindra Kumar Behera                                ....         Petitioner
                                                                      Mr. Arun Kumar Behera, Advocate

                                                                 -versus-
                               State of Odisha and Others                           ....      Opp. Parties
                                                                                Mr. Swayambhu Mishra,
                                                                             Additional Standing Counsel
                                           CORAM:
                                           JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
                                           JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

                                                           ORDER
          Order No.                                       07.03.2026

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

2. Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 10th November, 2025 (Annexure-1) passed by learned Presiding Officer LAR and R Authority, Cuttack, in Execution Case bearing EP No.09 of 2024 holding it to be not maintainable.

3. Section-70 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013, (for brevity 'the Act') reads such under:-

"70. Form of award.-(1) Every award under this Chapter shall be in writing signed by the Presiding Officer of the Authority, and shall specify the amount awarded under clause first of section 28, and also the amounts (if any) respectively awarded under each of the other clauses of the same subsection, together with the grounds of awarding each of the said amounts.

(2) Every such award shall be deemed to be a decree and the statement of the grounds of every such award a judgment within the meaning of clause (2), and clause (9) of respectively, of section 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908)."

Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY

Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK Date: 07-Mar-2026 17:18:34

3.1 Section 70 (2) of the Act makes it amply clear that every award under Chapter-VIII of the Act shall be a decree and an award is a judgment within the meaning of Clause-2 and Clause-9 respectively of Section-2 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908. Thus, the award passed by learned Presiding Officer, LAR and R Authority, Cuttack, under Section 64 of the Act is a decree within the meaning of Section-2 (2) of the Civil Procedure Code.

Section 63 of the Act, however, provides as such under.

"63. Jurisdiction of civil courts barred.-No civil court (other than High Court under article 226 or article 227 of the Constitution or the Supreme Court) shall have jurisdiction to entertain any dispute relating to land acquisition in respect of which the Collector or the Authority is empowered by or under this Act, and no injunction shall be granted by any court in respect of any such matter."

3.2 On a close reading of Section 63 of the Act makes it clear that the civil Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain any dispute relating to land acquisition, which is capable of being decided by the Collector or the Authority under the Act. There is no provision under the Act to entertain an execution proceeding of an award passed under the Act. Thus, competent civil Court has ample jurisdiction to entertain an execution proceeding for execution of an award passed under Section 64 of the Act.

4. In view of the above, Mr. Behera, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays for withdrawal of the writ petition to avail the remedy before the competent civil Court by filing an execution case.

5. Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel has no objection to the same.

Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY

Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK Date: 07-Mar-2026 17:18:34

6. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with an observation that the Petitioner may avail the remedy by filing an Execution Case before the competent civil Court.



                                                                  (K.R. Mohapatra)
                                                                        Judge


                                                                    (S.K Mishra)
          Sashikant                                                     Judge





 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter