p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.34856 of 2025 Kadam Bag …. Petitioner Mr. K.C.Dash, Advocate -versus- Spl. Land Acquisition Officer, Lower Irrigation Project, Khariar, Nuapada …. Opposite Party Mr.R.Pradhan, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY ORDER 27.4.2026 Order No. 03. 1. Heard Mr.Dash, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr.Pradhan, Additional Standing Counsel for State-Opposite Party. 2. Present writ petition is directed against order dated 18th April 2023 passed in CMA No.186 of 2017 (arising out of LAR Case No.44 of 2007) of the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Nuapada, wherein prayer of the Petitioner to restore LAR Case No.44 of 2007 has been rejected. 3. The Petitioner is a land looser and being dissatisfied with the amount of the land acquisition compensation, he raised reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short “the Digitally Signed Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 01-May-2026 17:31:49 Signature Not Verified p. 2 Act”). The same was registered as LAR Case No.44 of 2007 before the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Nuapada. Due to non-appearance of the Petitioner in the said case, the proceedings under Section 18 in LAR Case No.44 of 2007 was closed by returning reference in original to the Land Acquisition Officer vide order dated 2nd February 2012. Subsequently, the Petitioner applied for restoration of LAR Case No.44 of 2007 in the year 2017 by filing an application for restoration. Said restoration petition was registered as CMA No.186 of 2017. The learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nuapada vide his order dated 18th April 2023 dismissed the prayer for restoration made by the Petitioner on the ground that there is delay of five years in applying for restoration which is not explained satisfactorily. Said impugned order dated 18th April 2023 of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nuapada in rejecting the prayer for restoration of LAR Case No.44 of 2007 is challenged in the present writ petition. 4. The fact of acquisition of land measuring Ac.9.24 decimals of the Petitioner by Special Land Acquisition Officer for the project concerned is not disputed. The reference under Section 18 of the Act by way of objection for enhanced compensation was sent to Digitally Signed Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 01-May-2026 17:31:49 Signature Not Verified p. 3 the court and registered as LAR Case No.44 of 2007. The simple question arises here that, whether such a reference under Section 18 of the Act can be closed for default of appearance by the claimant ? 5. It is submitted that the issue involved in present writ petition is covered by a judgment of this Court dated 16th March 2026 passed in W.P.(C) No.34871 of 2025. In said decision, this Court relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Khazan Singh (Dead) By LRS vs. Union of India, (2002) 2 SCC 242, has allowed the writ petition directing for restoration of L.A. Reference Case. It is held that, “7. xx xx … … Such contention of the claimant being bona-fide and genuine ground cannot be easily discarded by the court on the guise of delay to approach the court, particularly in a matter relating to adjudication of enhanced compensation in terms of Section 18 of the Act. 8. As settled in the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court in Khazan Singh (supra) the approach of the learned civil court to close the reference amounting to dismissal of the case for default cannot be held sustainable in the facts of the present case. As such, this Court without any hesitation is inclined to set aside the impugned order by allowing the prayer for Digitally Signed Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 01-May-2026 17:31:49 Signature Not Verified p. 4 restoration of the Petitioner made before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division).” 6. In the given facts of the present case, which is similar to the facts of said decision of this Court, present writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 18th April 2023 of the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Nuapada (Annexure-1) is set aside and the prayer of the Petitioner for restoration of LAR Case No.44 of 2007 is allowed and the same is restored to the original file of learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Nauapada. ( B.P. Routray) Judge C.R. Biswal