Orissa HC Dismissed Writ Petition of Certiorari As It Being Devoid of Merits

Must Read

London Court Rejects Assange’s Extradition – What Happens Now? 

Earlier last week, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser, sitting in the Westminster Magistrates’ Court denied the Government of the U.S.A.'s...

Calcutta High Court Decides in Favor of Contractor as He Accidentally Pays an Excessively High Amount

Introduction The present writ petition has been filed for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to...

Petition Filed in Delhi High Court Challenging the New Privacy Policy of WhatsApp

A petition has been raised before the Delhi High Court challenging the updated privacy policy of the instant messaging app, WhatsApp. It is accused of looking into the virtual activities of the users,

Bombay High Court Says Pleas Against the Rejection of Nomination Before the Polls Is Not Maintainable

Bombay High Court on Wednesday held that a candidate cannot challenge his nomination by filing a writ petition before a court prior to the polls after his nominations have already been rejected by the Returning Officer (RO) for the Panchayat elections of January 15.

Bombay HC: It Will Be Difficult if Civic Bodies Don’t Take Action on Illegal Constructions

The Bombay High Court said on Wednesday that if the Municipal Corporations do not take action on the illegal constructions, things will become very difficult. This observation was made by a bench comprising Chief Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice Girish Kulkarni while hearing a PIL after the Bhiwandi building collapse on September 21st, 2020 which led to the death of 39 lives. Mumbai Thane, Ulhasnagar, Kalyan-Dombivli, Vasai-Virar, Navi Mumbai, and Bhiwandi-Nizampur corporations were filed as respondents.

Uttarakhand High Court Directed State Authorities To Frame SOP Regarding Kumbh Mela 2021

Noticing the commencement date of Kumbh Mela 2021 amid pandemic from 27 February 2021, the Uttarakhand High Court on Monday expressed concern with regard to organizing and conducting of the Mela and directed State Authorities to discuss and resolve the logistical problems which can come in organizing the Mela during the pandemic time.

Follow us

The Writ of Certiorari was filed before The High Court of Orissa under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, 1949, praying to quash the compensation roll under Annexure-3 and the impugned order passed by Claim Commission, Bhubaneswar. The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the writ petition stating it was devoid of merits.

Orissa High Court, Dismissed Writ Petition,
Orrisa High Court (c) Libertatem.in

Brief Facts of the Case

The Petitioner Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. (MCL) is a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd. incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Jagriti Vihar, Burla in the district of Sambalpur and it is carrying out mining activities of coal in different areas of Odisha such as Basundhara, Garjanbahal, and Orient Area Lakhanpur etc.

The Central Government issued a preliminary notification under section 4(1) of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 giving notice of its intention to prospect for coal in different revenue villages in the district of Sundargarh. Thereafter, notification under section 7(1) of the 1957 Act was issued with an intention to acquire the lands in [in respect of village – Sardega, Gopalpur, Jhupurunga, Ratnansara, Tikilpara, Bankibahal, Balinga, Kulda, Siarmal, Tumulia, Lalma, Garjanbahal, Bangurkela, Karlikachhar, Gopalpur, Kiripsira] of Sundargarh district. In pursuance of the notification under section 7(1), declaration of acquisition under section 9(1) of the 1957 Act was made in respect of the aforesaid villages. Thereafter the notified lands along with all rights therein vested absolutely in the petitioner company (MCL) in pursuance of the notification under section 11(1) of the 1957 Act.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide order passed in SLP in 2007 in the case of MCL directed to establish a Commission to prepare its report as envisaged in the scheme, first in respect of the lands in the village of Gopalpur in the district of Sundargarh. The Commission was also asked to determine the rate or amount of compensation/mesne profit payable to landholders. Therefore the learned Commission prepared the reports/schemes i.e. Gopalpur and recommended the cut-off date to be September 2010 for assessment of compensation of the lands of Gopalpur which were accepted by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

Issues before the Court

The Petitioner Company filed a Writ Petition against the opposite party no. 4 that they with a malafide intention and by adopting the fraudulent means, constructed a new house in village Siarmal after the cut-off date i.e. September 2010 to get compensation and R&R benefit including employment under category-I from the petitioner company at the cost of public exchequer which is illegal and arbitrary.

It is the further case of the writ petitioner that the learned commission without hearing the petitioner company and without determining the age of the structures or without taking assistance of any other scientific agency approved the compensation roll on the basis of unilateral measurement of the staff of the commission.

Arguments before the Court

It was argued before the court that – whether the house of the opposite party no.4 was constructed after the cut-off date or not and whether the said opposite party no.4 adopted fraudulent means to get the new structure measured by influencing the survey staff of the commissioner in order to extract compensation and R&R benefits.

It is the case of the petitioner company that while passing the impugned order, the learned commission has ignored the order passed by the Civil Court that the Claim Commission is to hear the grievance of the oustees and adjudicate upon. The Claim Commission wherein after hearing the petitioner company, the names of the Roshan Patel and ten others were deleted from the compensation roll for the structures/houses constructed after cut-off date i.e. September 2010.

In the recall petition, the petitioner company categorically stated that there was no structure over the case land as on cut-off date i.e. September 2010 as per the satellite imaginary and hence the opposite party no.4 was not entitled to get any amount of compensation for the structure.

Court’s View

The question of awarding compensation in favour of opposite party no.4 in respect of house/structure constructed was neither filed by opposite party no.4 of the respective writ petition of awarding compensation nor did the Commission pass any order on any date directing payment of compensation. The amount of compensation has been offered by MCL in the compensation roll prepared by it and not by the commission and the same was approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

For the second argument, the Hon’ble Supreme Court directed that the learned Claims Commission only to hear the land oustees not the petitioner company and it reveals that the Claims Commission can delete/modify the compensation roll, a similar observation was made by the learned Claims Commission, Bhubaneswar while disposing of Civil (Misc.) case.

Court’s Decision to Dismiss Writ Petition

The Claim Commission rejecting the petitions filed by petitioner company for modification/recall of the earlier order passed by the Commission appears to be correct and there is no illegality or perversity in the same.

It also finds no infirmity in the compensation roll prepared under Annexure-3.

It also finds that the learned counsel for the petitioner company failed to produce the authenticated satellite imagery of 13th November 2010 of village Siarmal indicating the status of plots of the opposite party no. 4.

Accordingly, The High Court of Odisha dismissed the writ petition of the petitioner company as it is devoid of any merits.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

London Court Rejects Assange’s Extradition – What Happens Now? 

Earlier last week, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser, sitting in the Westminster Magistrates’ Court denied the Government of the U.S.A.'s request to the U.K. to...

Calcutta High Court Decides in Favor of Contractor as He Accidentally Pays an Excessively High Amount

Introduction The present writ petition has been filed for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to revoke the Petitioner’s offer as...

Petition Filed in Delhi High Court Challenging the New Privacy Policy of WhatsApp

A petition has been raised before the Delhi High Court challenging the updated privacy policy of the instant messaging app, WhatsApp. It is accused of looking into the virtual activities of the users,

Bombay High Court Says Pleas Against the Rejection of Nomination Before the Polls Is Not Maintainable

Bombay High Court on Wednesday held that a candidate cannot challenge his nomination by filing a writ petition before a court prior to the polls after his nominations have already been rejected by the Returning Officer (RO) for the Panchayat elections of January 15.

Bombay HC: It Will Be Difficult if Civic Bodies Don’t Take Action on Illegal Constructions

The Bombay High Court said on Wednesday that if the Municipal Corporations do not take action on the illegal constructions, things will become very difficult. This observation was made by a bench comprising Chief Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice Girish Kulkarni while hearing a PIL after the Bhiwandi building collapse on September 21st, 2020 which led to the death of 39 lives. Mumbai Thane, Ulhasnagar, Kalyan-Dombivli, Vasai-Virar, Navi Mumbai, and Bhiwandi-Nizampur corporations were filed as respondents.

Uttarakhand High Court Directed State Authorities To Frame SOP Regarding Kumbh Mela 2021

Noticing the commencement date of Kumbh Mela 2021 amid pandemic from 27 February 2021, the Uttarakhand High Court on Monday expressed concern with regard to organizing and conducting of the Mela and directed State Authorities to discuss and resolve the logistical problems which can come in organizing the Mela during the pandemic time.

Writ Petition Not Maintainable Against Mahindra Finance, Being a Purely Private Body: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court reiterated that Writ Petition against the purely private body is not maintainable and dismissed the petition which was filed against Mahindra Finance Bank as Arif Khan v. Branch Manager Mahindra Finance Sultanpur & Another.

Publication of Notices for Inter-Faith Marriages No Longer Mandatory: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has passed a landmark judgment that likely brings relief to inter-faith marriage. The Court on Wednesday said that the mandatory publication of Notices of Inter-Faith marriages will now be optional to protect the Privacy and Liberty of the Couple. The Court observed that the publication of the notice would “invade the fundamental rights of liberty and privacy”. Therefore, it has made it optional for the couple, they can now request in form of writing to a marriage officer to publish or not to publish a notice regarding the marriage.

Bombay High Court to NIA: Consider Health and Age of Varavara Rao Before Opposing His Bail Plea

The Bombay HC on Wednesday observed that ‘we are all humans’ and asked the National Investigation Agency and the Maharashtra Government to consider the health and age of the Telugu poet-activist Varavara Rao before making submissions in response to his bail plea application on medical grounds.

Supreme Court Agrees To Examine Centre’s Plea To Keep Adultery a Crime in Armed Forces

The Centre appealed to the Supreme court on Wednesday, pleading that the 2018 judgment of decriminalizing adultery under IPC must not apply to the armed forces. The Supreme Court in a path-breaking verdict in 2018 decriminalized adultery and declared all its provisions unconstitutional as it diminishes the value of women, but maintained that it continues to be a ground for divorce.

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -