Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
K.R.MOHAPATRA, SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
Sterlite Iron & Steel Company – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. land acquisition and refund procedures (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments against refund claim (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. withdrawal request impacts entitlement (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. petitioner initiated withdrawal process (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. dismissal of the writ petition (Para 12) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Petitioner, in this Writ Petition, prays for a direction to set aside the letter No.14493 dated 2nd August, 2012 (Annexure-11) issued by the Land Officer, Odisha Infrastructure Development Corporation (for brevity, ‘IDCO’), Bhubaneswar forfeiting the amount deposited by the Petitioner towards administrative charges and land acquisition establishment contingencies as per the decision taken in the 66th meeting dated 4th October, 2005 (Annexure-12) of the Board of Directors and the Circular No.32463/R dated 14th June, 1999 (Annexure-13) of the Government of Odisha issued by the Department of Revenue and Disaster Management.
3. Mr. Mohanty, learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner submits that on 15th October, 2004, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed between the Petitioner and the State Government to set up a 5 million tons per annum (MTPA)
The forfeiture of administrative charges due to withdrawal of land acquisition is valid when initiated by the project proponent as per established policy guidelines.
The court clarified that a party cannot be treated as abandoning a project due to delays in acquiring land by the authority responsible, highlighting the entitlement to a refund under specific circum....
Approval conditions for land acquisition must be met to establish vested rights; public interest considerations prevail in land allocation disputes.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for the acquisition proceedings to lapse under Section 24(2) of Act of 2013, both the contingencies of non-possession and non-payment of compe....
The court established that adherence to procedural fairness and the right to a hearing are fundamental in land acquisition processes under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Point of law: Absence of an award in terms of the provisions of the Act, the reference as made to the L.A.R.R. Authority as was done by the District Level Negotiations Committee would have no legal e....
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Drawing of Panchanama of taking possession is mode of taking possession in land acquisition cases – Land vests in Government and any re-entry is unlawful.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
