The Land Acquisition Officer lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate title disputes and must refer such matters to the Civil Court for proper adjudication under Sections 10, 18, and 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

JUDGMENT :

ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.

1. Since, both the revisions under Section 115 of the C.P.C., 1908 have been filed by the Petitioners challenging one order i.e. an order dated 19.11.2013 passed in Misc. Case No.4 of 2013 by the Land Acquisition Officer, Angul (O.P. No.2), then, both the revisions have been taken up together analogously for their final disposal through this common judgment.

2. The factual back grounds of these revisions, which prompted the Petitioners for filing of the same is that, the properties covered under Hal Khata Nos.259 and 64 in Mouza Nandichhod @ Gopiballavpur corresponding to Sabik Khata No.161/6 and 90 were acquired by the State Government as per notification dated 19.01.2008 for M/s. Tata Sponge Iron Limited.

3. When, during the course of land acquisition proceedings, compensation amount of the above acquired properties was passed in favour of the O.P. Nos.3 to 5 by the Land Acquisition Officer, Angul (O.P. No.2), then, the Petitioners filed application under Sections 10 , 18 and 30 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 before the O.P. No.2 claiming their shares in the compensation amounts of the said acquired properties on the ground that, they are the persons interested in the said acquired properties having their interest in the same and prayed before the O.P. No.2 to refer the said dispute to the Civil Court for apportionments as well as enhancement of the compensation amount, but, the O.P. No.2 rejected their application.

For which, they (Petitioners) challenged the same filing a writ petition vide W.P.(C) No.6645 of 2011 before the High Court of Orissa. As per the judgment dated 16.05.2011 passed in W.P.(C) No.6645 of 2011, the High Court set aside to the order passed by the O.P. No.2 refusing to refer the matter to the Civil Court and directed to deposit the compensation amount of the acquired properties in the Bank without disbursing the same to the O.P. Nos.3 to 5 till the proper apportionments are made by the Civil Court through reference.

Thereafter, the O.P. Nos.3 to 5 filed a review petition bearing No.125 of 2011 praying for reviewing the above order dated 16.05.2011 passed in W.P.(C) No.6645 of 2011. That review petition No.125 of 2011 was disposed of on dated 27.10.2011 by the High Court modifying the order dated 16.05.2011 to a little extent directing the O.P. No.2 to deposit the awarded compensation amount in any one of the Nationalized Banks and the objection of the Petitioners shall be decided by the O.P. No.2 and the deposited compensation amount shall not be withdrawn by the O.P. Nos.3 to 5 till then.

Thereafter, the O.P. Nos.3 to 5 approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing Civil Appeal No.918 of 2013 challenging the order of the High Court. That, Civil Appeal No.918 of 2013 was disposed of by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on dated 01.02.2013 directing the O.P. No.2 to reconsider the objections of the Petitioners under Sections 10 and 18 read with Section 30 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 and to decide the same through a speaking order within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt/production of the copy of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Thereafter, on the basis of the aforesaid directions made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as per judgment dated 01.02.2013 passed in Civil Appeal No.918 of 2013, the Land Acquisition Officer, Angul (O.P. No.2) initiated Misc. Case No.4 of 2013 for reconsideration of the objection under Sections 10 and 18 read with Section 30 of the LAND ACQUISITION