PURNA CHANDRA RATH Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ application the Petitioner -Purna Chandra Rath has sought for direction to the Opp. Parties to include his name as a "land oustee" & to extend the benefits under the "Rehabilitation Scheme" to him.

(2.) IN paragraph -5 of the writ application, the Petitioner has asserted that his name was not mentioned in the list of land oustees prepared by the Government, for which reasons he made a representation to Opp. Party No. 3 -Land Acquisition Officer, Angul. It is further asserted by the Petitioner that Opp. Party No. 3 caused an inquiry & in course of such inquiry; the land oustee had been called upon to nominate a person from his family who would be entitled to receive the benefits under the scheme. Accordingly, the land oustee had nominated her daughter "Sasmita Rath" as her nominee to receive the benefits under the said scheme.

(3.) CONSIDERING the submissions as noted hereinabove since the Petitioner was a claimant before the Land Acquisition Officer, Dhenkanal in which award was passed pertaining to the holding No. 1073 & due to inability on the part of the Petitioner to produce any evidence of the adoption deed, award has been passed in favour of the recorded owner of such land.