The clarificatory Notification under Annexure-3, by introducing additional conditions for eligibility to Resettlement and Rehabilitation benefits, was deemed oppressive and could only have prospective application.

JUDGMENT :

B. Mohanty, J.

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition with a prayer to quash the Government of Odisha Revenue and Disaster Management Department Notification dated 20.10.2010 under Annexure-3 containing clarification on “Displaced/Affected families” with reference to Odisha Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy, 2006, for short, “2006 Policy”. He has also made an alternative prayer that the above mentioned Notification under Annexure-3 should not be given retrospective effect and the opposite parties be directed to extend the benefits of the Odisha Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy, 2006 to the project affected persons.

2. Mr.S.K.Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the father of the petitioner had purchased Ac.3.15 dec. from Ghasiram Domb on 10.3.2003 and Ac.4.09 dec. from one Sabe Harijan and others on 17.4.2003 through Registered Sale Deeds and the above noted lands were mutated in favour of the father of the petitioner vide orders dated 3.12.2003 and 2.1.2004 passed respectively in Mutation Case No. 1055 of 2003 and Mutation Case No. 1057 of 2022

3. More than 75% of such land was acquired by the Government for Ret Irrigation Project in the district of Kalahandi pursuant to initiation of land acquisition proceeding on publication of preliminary Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 19.1.2006 and compensation for such acquisition was paid to father of the petitioner. On

14.5.2006 the Government of Odisha brought into force “2006 Policy”. On 4.6.2007 vide Annexure-1A, certain amendments were introduced to the “2006 Policy”. By the selfsame amendment the definition of “affected family” was introduced to mean a family whose land is affected by construction of the project but is not displaced or required to be displaced. It also introduced beneficial provisions for such affected families under Clause 3. On 25.8.2010 vide Annexure-2, the Government of Odisha sanctioned rehabilitation assistance for payment to both displaced families as well as affected families. Thereafter though the benefits under the “2006 Policy” concerning the affected families were deposited however subsequently the authorities directed the bank not to disburse the same. The petitioner came to know that such withholding of the disbursement occurred on account of the clarification dated 20.10.2010 issued by the Government in Revenue and Disaster Management Department under Annexure-3 which made it clear that the persons or families who are not ordinarily residing in or near the project area for a period of at least three years prior to the date of Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short, “1894 Act” are not eligible for getting R & R benefits. On account of this though rehabilitation assistance was sanctioned under Annexures-2 and 4, the father of the petitioner did not get the R & R benefit under the “2006 Policy” read with amendments as introduced in 2007 under Annexure-1A. Since the father has died in the meantime, the petitioner has moved this Court by filing the present writ petition with the above noted prayers.

According to Mr.Joshi when the father of the petitioner purchased the case lands in 2003, there was no proposal for establishment of Ret Medium Irrigation Project at Kusumkhunti. Much after the purchase only in 2005 as would be clear from first paragraph of Annexure-1, the State Government proposed to construct the irrigation work known as Ret Irrigation Project. Therefore, it cannot be said that the father of the petitioner acted in an oblique or malafide manner in purchasing the land in question to avail the benefits under “2006 Policy” more particularly when on the dates of purchase in 2003 neither such a policy nor the later amendment to “2006 Policy” under Annexure-1A were in existence. Secondly he contended that Annexure-3 only covers the cases where the persons purchased the land just before the land acquisition. In the present ca