JUDGMENT

DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, C.J. — This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 4.8.2006 passed by the Tahasildar, Pipli in Revenue Misc. Case No. 1 of 2006. Opposite party no. 1 - Institute has been put to possession by the State of Orissa over petitioners’ land. Grievance of the petitioners is that they have been dispossessed illegally without following the procedure prescribed by law and the said dispossession is in violation of the mandate of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India. Land had been taken away from then without initiating the acquisition proceedings. Thus, they are entitled for restoration of posses¬sion of the land. Alternatively they should be paid compensation.

2. Learned counsel for opposite party no.1 Institute has submitted that the Institute is not concerned with the original ownership. The land has been handed over to it by the State of Orissa and there was an agreement between opposite party no. 1 and the State of Orissa for providing free land to establish the Research Institute. Therefore, if the petitioners claim land or compensation thereof it is the State of Orissa which is responsible and not opposite party no.1.

3. Mr. P.K. Khunt