The Land Acquisition Officer, thereafter, heard the matter afresh and rejected the application by order dated 15.12.95 which has been again set aside by the High Court on revision being preferred by the respondent herein.
Notification under Sections 4 1 and 17 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 hereinafter referred to as the Act was issued on 13.7.90.
From the record it appears that the 1st respondent orally protested as to the sufficiency of the amount of companypensation awarded and wanted to have his protest recorded but the authority reprimanded him that if any protest or objection was recorded the amount of companypensation would number be paid and the same would be deposited in the Treasury.
The State Government acquired private land in village Gadpur under Sukinanda Tehsil in the District of Jajpur, Orissa for development of an integrated industrial companyplex.
An agreement was allegedly entered into between the State and the land owners on 6.8.92 on the basis of which the payment of companypensation was made on that date, allegedly on the agreed terms.
Facts of this case illustrate a classic example as to how the companycerned authority subjugated and suppressed the rights of the illiterate rustic tribal villagers of far flung area from the madding crowd and companyrced them to accept the price fixed by the companycerned authority despite their protest.
By the impugned order, the High Court directed the authority to send the reference to the appropriate civil companyrt within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the order.
The 1st respondent, thereafter, preferred an application under Section 18 of the Act for reference for determining higher companypensation by regd.
These two appeals have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 19th February, 1997 passed by the High Court.
Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent filed civil revision petition before the High Court.
We have heard learned companynsel for the parties at length.
Notice under Section 12 2 of the Act was issued to the respondent claimant on 27.7.92.
19869 OF 1997 SEMA,J Leave granted in Special Leave Petition C No.
It is also alleged that the numberice under Section 12 2 of the Act was number received by the respondent.
It is alleged that the 1st respondent being an illiterate tribal person was companyrced to receive the companypensation amount without having recorded any protest.
4424 of 1997 has been preferred by Orissa Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation and the appeal arising out of SLP 19869 of 1997 has been preferred by the State of Orissa.
Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 12.6.91.
The Award under Section 11 of the Act was passed on 25.7.92.
By order dated 11.9.95, the High Court disposed of the revision petition by setting aside the order dated 8.12.92 and directed the Land Acquisition Officer to re hear the question of maintainability of the application under Section 18 of the Act after affording an opportunity of hearing to the 1st respondent by adducing evidence.
In the said Notification land companyprising Acre 0.65/5 Kadi belonging to respondent No.
1 companytesting respondent was also acquired along with other land owners.
Even otherwise the Award was made on 25.7.1992 is number disputed.
9564 of 2003 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION C NO.
Since both the appeals arise out of the companymon judgment of the High Court, they are being disposed of by this companymon order.
WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
The companyy of the Award dated 25.7.1992 is accompanied by an affidavit dated 12.11.2003 sworn in by Mr.J.K.Das, Advocate on behalf of the appellants in Civil Appeal arising out of SLP No.
Civil Appeal No.
19869 of 1997.
4424 of 1997.
On 8.12.92, the Land Acquisition Officer declined to refer the application under Section 18 of the Act to the companypetent civil companyrt.
A.D. on 17.9.92 to the authority and the same was received on 18.9.92.
