Orissa High Court
Rachita Swain And Others vs Land Acquisition Officer-Cum- …. … 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. 3061 OF 2026
Rachita Swain and others .... Petitioner
Mr. Bhubananda Lenka, Advocate
-versus-
Land Acquisition Officer-Cum- .... Opp. Parties
Competent Authority, Bhubaneswar
and another
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. Petitioners, in this writ petition prays for the following relief:-
Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, it is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble
Court may graciously be pleased to.-
i) Direct/ order the Opposite Parties to grant
interest on the aggregate compensation amount
including solatium from the date of taking possession
till the date of actual payment @ 9% p.a. for the first
year and then @15% p.a. for the rest period in the
interest of justice; and
ii) Pass such other order[s) or issue
direction[s) as may
be deemed fit and proper in the bonafide interest of
justice;
And for this act of kindness, the Petitioners
as in duty bound shall ever pray.”
3. It is submitted that the land of the Petitioners was acquired by
the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) under the provisions
of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) and an
award under Section 3-G of the Act is passed. The Petitioners claiming
interest over the compensation for land acquisition, approached this
Court in W.P.(C) No.8851 of 2023, which was disposed of on 4th April,
Page 1 of 2
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
2023 with a direction to the Petitioners to pursue the remedy in
appropriate forum in accordance with law. It was also made clear that
while considering the case of the Petitioners, the Authority should take
into consideration the ratio in the case of Mehrawal Khewaji Trust
(Registered) Faridkot and others v. State of Punjab and others,
(2012) 5 SCC 432. Petitioners instead of availing the remedy by
approaching appropriate forum available under Section 3-G (5) of
the Act, moved the competent Authority, Land Acquisition under the
Act by filing a representation for grant of interest. It is alleged by
the Petitioners that the competent Authority, Land Acquisition, is not
responding to the direction of this Court in W.P.(C) No.8851 of
2023. Hence, this writ petition has been filed seeking for the
aforesaid relief.
4. Upon hearing learned counsel for the Petitioners and on
perusal of record, it appears that this Court, while disposing of
W.P.(C) No.8851 of 2023, had granted liberty to the Petitioners to
avail the remedy before the appropriate forum in accordance with
law. The Petitioners without availing such remedy, had again
approached the competent Authority, Land Acquisition by filing
representation for redressal of their grievances. Since the Petitioners
have not yet approached the Arbitrator under Section 3-G (5) of the
Act, we are not inclined to entertain the prayer made in the writ petition.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.
5.1 Dismissal of the writ petition, however, shall not preclude the
Petitioners to work out the remedy available under law.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(S.K Mishra)
s.s.satapathy Judge
Page 2 of 2
