Orissa High Court
Rabindra Kumar Behera vs State Of Odisha And Others …. Opp. … on 7 March, 2026
Author: K.R. Mohapatra
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 07-Mar-2026 17:18:34
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.3594 OF 2026
Rabindra Kumar Behera .... Petitioner
Mr. Arun Kumar Behera, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others .... Opp. Parties
Mr. Swayambhu Mishra,
Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 07.03.2026
01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 10th
November, 2025 (Annexure-1) passed by learned Presiding Officer
LAR and R Authority, Cuttack, in Execution Case bearing EP No.09
of 2024 holding it to be not maintainable.
3. Section-70 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency
in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013, (for
brevity ‘the Act’) reads such under:-
“70. Form of award.-(1) Every award under this Chapter shall be
in writing signed by the Presiding Officer of the Authority, and shall
specify the amount awarded under clause first of section 28, and also
the amounts (if any) respectively awarded under each of the other
clauses of the same subsection, together with the grounds of
awarding each of the said amounts.
(2) Every such award shall be deemed to be a decree and
the statement of the grounds of every such award a judgment within
the meaning of clause (2), and clause (9) of respectively, of section
2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908).”
Page 1 of 3
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 07-Mar-2026 17:18:34
3.1 Section 70 (2) of the Act makes it amply clear that every award
under Chapter-VIII of the Act shall be a decree and an award is a
judgment within the meaning of Clause-2 and Clause-9 respectively of
Section-2 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908. Thus, the award passed
by learned Presiding Officer, LAR and R Authority, Cuttack, under
Section 64 of the Act is a decree within the meaning of Section-2 (2)
of the Civil Procedure Code.
Section 63 of the Act, however, provides as such under.
“63. Jurisdiction of civil courts barred.-No civil court (other than
High Court under article 226 or article 227 of the Constitution or
the Supreme Court) shall have jurisdiction to entertain any dispute
relating to land acquisition in respect of which the Collector or the
Authority is empowered by or under this Act, and no injunction shall
be granted by any court in respect of any such matter.”
3.2 On a close reading of Section 63 of the Act makes it clear that
the civil Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain any dispute relating to land
acquisition, which is capable of being decided by the Collector or the
Authority under the Act. There is no provision under the Act to
entertain an execution proceeding of an award passed under the Act.
Thus, competent civil Court has ample jurisdiction to entertain an
execution proceeding for execution of an award passed under Section
64 of the Act.
4. In view of the above, Mr. Behera, learned counsel for the
Petitioner prays for withdrawal of the writ petition to avail the remedy
before the competent civil Court by filing an execution case.
5. Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel has no
objection to the same.
Page 2 of 3
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 07-Mar-2026 17:18:34
6. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of as
withdrawn with an observation that the Petitioner may avail the remedy
by filing an Execution Case before the competent civil Court.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(S.K Mishra)
Sashikant Judge
Page 3 of 3
