LAWS(ORI)-2024-4-89

LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER GANJAM Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

Decided On April 23, 2024
Land Acquisition Officer Ganjam Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal has been preferred by the State-Appellant challenging the order / award dtd. 4/5/2005 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chhatrapur in M.J.C. No.73 of 1996, vide which the Court below assessed the compensation amount payable to the claimants/objectors @ Rs.2,00,000.00 per acre along with solacium and further interest in terms of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, shortly here in after 'the Act, 1894'.

(2.) The brief facts, which led to filing of this Appeal, are that an area of Ac.0.583 decimals of Bilo Do Fasali-II (Wet-II) kisam of land appertaining to Sl. Nos.1427, 1429 and 1430 under Khata Nos.610/809 and 325 situated in village Burupada under Hinjili P.S in the district of Ganjam belonging to the Respondent No.1 (dead) was acquired by the State under Sec. 4(1) of the Act, 1894 vide Notification dtd. 31/1/1994. A declaration dtd. 20/9/1994 for construction of approach road to Ghodahada river was made for which an enquiry was conducted under Sec. 11 of the Act, 1894.

(3.) The Appeal has been preferred basically on the ground that the Court below ought to have examined the validity of the award determined by the Land Acquisition Officer (L.A.O.) within the parameter and mandatory guidelines stipulated under Sec. 23 and 24 of the Act, 1894, and has clearly acted in excess of its jurisdiction. The Court below neither has assigned any reason nor the circumstances under which it preferred to differ with the assessment of the market value determined by the L.A.O. In terms of Sec. 23 of the Act, 1894, the market value of the acquired land on the date of publication of notification under Sec. 4(1) of the Act, 1894, has to be taken into consideration. However, the referral Court committed an error in brushing aside the contemporaneous materials available on record vide Ext. A. The reference has not been judiciously determined and the manner in which the referral Court proceeded in enhancing exorbitantly the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.2,00,000.00 per acre on the basis of untrustworthy statements of interested witnesses and on consideration of future potentiality of the acquired land is against the evidence on record.