FAKIR CHARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions have been filed by the declarant/owners under the repealing Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 seeking the relief to quash the order dated 28.3.1998 passed by the Special Officer and Competent Authority, Urban Agglomeration, Cuttack in U.L.C. Case Nos. 4/83, 5/83, 11/84, 12/84, 13/84 and 14/84 as well as the order dated 5.5.1999 of the appellate authority, namely, Revenue Divisional Commissioner, Central Division, Cuttack in U.L.C. Appeal No. 2 of 1998 and to allow the claim of the petitioners in the said U.L.C. cases. Bereft of unnecessary details, the short facts, which are necessary for effectual adjudication of the case are that:

(2.) Challenging the orders passed by the competent authority and the appellate Court, the deceased-petitioner filed OJC No. 7386 of 1999 on 23.09.1999. In the meantime the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999, (Act 15 of 1989) hereinafter to be referred to as "Repeal Act" came into force with effect from 22.3.1999, which was adopted by the State Government on 5.4.2002 vide resolution passed in the State Legislature published in the Orissa Gazette Extraordinary No. 574 dated 27.4.2002, Section 3 (2) whereof provides that where any land is deemed to have vested in the State Government under Sub-section (3) of Section 10 of the Principal Act, possession of which has not been taken over by the State Government or any person duly authorized by the State Government in this behalf or by the competent authority and any amount has been paid by the State Government with respect to such land, then such land shall not be restored unless the amount paid, if any, has been refunded to the State Government and under Section 4 of the Repeal Act, all proceedings relating to any order made or purported to be made under the Principal Act pending immediately before the commencement of the Act, before any Court, Tribunal or other authority, shall abate.

(3.) The said writ petition (OJC No. 7386 of 1999) was disposed of with a direction to the State Government to consider the application of the petitioner under Section 20 and pass appropriate order in consonance with the Repeal Act as also the circulars and resolutions issued by it at an early date. Pursuant to the said direction of this Court, no order was passed applying the said provisions of the Repeal Act despite the fact that the State Government represented by the Housing and Urban Development Department in its meeting held on 26.4.2002 passed a resolution regarding restoration of the surplus land to the land owners. Thereafter, the deceased-petitioner filed a review petition bearing RVWPET No. 112 of 2005 before this Court to review the order dated 29.6.2005 passed in OJC No. 7386 of 1999. In the said review petition, it was specifically averred that neither possession was taken over nor any compensation was paid to the petitioners and in appropriate cases where possession has neither been taken over nor compensation has been paid, the State Government still holds the power to grant exemption as prescribed under Section 20 in view of the adoption of the Repeal Act by the State Legislature. This Court while allowing the review petition, in paragraph 6 and 7 observed as follows: