IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S.K. Panigrahi, G. Satapathy, JJ.
The Collector and District Magistrate, Jagatsinghpur & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
Harekrushna Samal & Others - Opposite Parties
RVWPET No.169 of 2021, RVWPET No.167 of 2021 with CONTC Nos.4724 and 4725 of 2021
Decided On : 08-08-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background on land acquisition and court order review. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. petitioners argue for review based on procedural errors. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. opposite parties emphasize entitlement under act, 2013. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. key issues for legal determination outlined. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. clarification of standards for review applications. (Para 21 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. review characteristics and parameters discussed. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 7. review petition addressed major procedural oversights. (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 8. judicial responsibility to rectify errors in decisions. (Para 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 9. analysis of statutory implications and timelines for review. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 10. review of acquisitions to ensure statutory compliance. (Para 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 11. clarification on compensation principles and ex-gratia distinction. (Para 42 , 43 , 44) |
| 12. final observations on the implications of procedural compliance. (Para 45 , 46 , 47) |
| 13. conclusion and orders following the review. (Para 48 , 49 , 50 , 51) |
JUDGMENT :
S.K. Panigrahi, J.
1. Since the aforesaid RVWPETs and CONTCs arise out of the same judgment, the same were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. RVWPET Nos.169 and 167 of 2021 have been filed under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE , 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “the C.P.C.” for brevity) at the instance of the State with a prayer to review the common order dated 19.02.2021 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.1112 and W.P.(C) No.1114 of 2016 directing the land Acquisition Officer (Civil), Jagatsinghpur to assess the compensation in terms of the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and extend such benefits to the Petitioners therein accordingly.
3. CONTC Nos.4724 and 4725 of 2021 have been filed by the Petitioners for non-compliance of the common order dated 19.02.2021 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.1112 and W.P.(C)No.1114 of 2016 by the Opposite Parties/ State.
4. It is apparent that the review Petitioners were the Opposite Parties in W.P.(C) No.1112 and W.P.(C) No.1114 of 2016.
I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:
5. The then Petitioners are now Opposite Parties in W.P.(C) No. 1112 of 2016 and W.P.(C) No. 1114 of 2016 were land owners of village Fatepur and Patrapur whose lands measuring Ac. 86.64 dec were acquired by the State Government upon following the due process of law for establishing an industrial township by IDCO.
6. Notifications u/s 4(1) and 6(1) of the Act, 1894 have been issued respectively on 8.7.2008 and 31.8.2009. The first award was passed on 18.3.2011 and notices u/s 12(2) of the Act, 1894 for receiving the award amounts were issued at the same time to all other such landowners.Physical possession of the entire land has been handed over to IDCO.
7. In an earlier land acquisition proceeding of other villages situated nearby in 2006, the land owners had agitated against the alleged low estimate and decided not to receive compensation money. Accordingly, a tripartite meeting was held between the land owners, the State Government and the private company for whom the land was being acquired where the rate of compensation was enhanced.
8. The present Opposite Parties also similarly did not accept the compensation amount and demanded revision of the same. Therefore, the compensation amount awarded initially was revised by the 1st District Level Compensation Advisory Committee.
9. However, the present Opposite Parties preferred W.P.(C) No. 1112 of 2016 and W.P.(C) No. 1114 of 2016 seeking higher compensation in terms of the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 2013”). Vide impugned order dated 19.2.2021, further corrected on 21.4.2021, this Court was observed that the present
S. Nagaraj v. State of Karnataka
Hari Vishnu Kamath v. Syed Ahmad Ishaque
Northern India Caterers (India) Ltd. v. Lt. Governor of Delhi
S. Madhusudhan Reddy v. V. Narayana Reddy
Sow Chandra Kante v. Sheikh Habib
Indore Development Authority (Lapse-5 J.) v. Manoharlal
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Pratibha Industries Ltd.
A review petition must demonstrate a patent error in the prior decision without re-evaluating the matter on its merits; the existence of new evidence justifies revisiting conclusions drawn under diff....
(1) Courts should adjudicate on all issues and give its findings on all issues and not to pronounce judgment only on one of issues.(2) Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – There being delay in pass....
Possession and compensation aspects are crucial in determining the sustainability of relief under Section 24(2) of the Act 2013.
Subsequent purchasers of land can only claim compensation based on their vendors' titles and cannot challenge acquisition proceedings initiated under different statutes.
No lapse of proceedings under the Act of 1894 occurs if compensation has been paid and possession of the acquired land has been assumed, even if no award has been made.
Section 24 of the Right to Compensation Act does not apply to acquisitions initiated under the West Bengal Requisition and Acquisition Act; subsequent purchasers can only claim compensation based on ....
The physical possession of the land and tendering of compensation discharge the state's obligation, and the land essential for public purpose cannot be released from acquisition.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Landowners who had refused to accept compensation or who sought reference for higher compensation, cannot claim that acquisition proceedings had lapsed under Se....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.