NARENDRA BESAN Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal involves a challenge to the judgment dated 16.2.2016 passed in Land Acquisition Reference Case No.369 of 2013.

(2.) Short background involving the case is that Government by Notification No.16997 dated 28.4.2010 acquired an area of Ac.7.690 decimals under Hal Khata No.35 of Mouza- Lankahuda for establishment of Ultra Mega Power Project at Bhedabahal in the district of Sundargarh. Upon entering into due enquiry, the Land Acquisition Officer settled the compensation amount of Rs.1,74,79,755/- in favour of Narendra Besan, the appellant in this Court and O.P.3 in the Section 30 of the L.A.Act, 1894 proceeding. It is at this point of time and getting information of grant of compensation in favour of Narendra Besan, respondent no.3 of this Appeal, Manjari Tanty sought for reference of the matter to appropriate court in exercise of power under Section 30 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the premises of her having a share in the compensation awarded. The dispute was registered as Land Acquisition Reference Case No.369 of 2013. As a consequence and follow up action, Section 30 applicant, the State and the Objector therein, i.e., the beneficiaries of the land acquisition proceeding were all issued notice for filing their respective statement involving Section 30 dispute. It appears, Narendra Besan and Manjari Tanty, the contestants filed their respective claim statement and trial was undertaken. Manjari Tanty, respondent no.3 herein, i.e., the claimant in the Section 30 application examined four witnesses and exhibited Ext.1 to satisfy her case. Similarly, Narendra Besan, the main contestant while examining three witnesses also exhibited some documents as Exts.A to G. In conclusion of the trial based on the contentions of the parties, the evidence and the materials brought by way of evidence allowing the Section 30 application the trial court passed the following order :-

(3.) Challenging the impugned judgment dated 16.2.2016, respondent no.3 therein, the present appellant filed the Appeal on the following grounds :-