p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 31773 of 2024 Gananath Sethy ….. Petitioner Ms. Samapika Mishra, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Odisha represented through the Collector and District Magistrate, Keonjhar, At/PO/PS/Dist. Keonjhar. 2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Anandapur Barrage Project, Salapada, Keonjhar. 3. The Presiding Officer, LAR & R Authority (Northern Division), Sambalpur. ….. Opp. Parties Mr. Siba Narayan Biswal, A.S.C. CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER 22.08.2025 Order No. 03. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 8th August, 2022 (Annexure-2) passed by the Presiding Officer, LAR & R Authority (N.D.), Sambalpur in L.A. Case No.38 of 2020, wherein the reference under section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) was disposed of without enhancing the compensation. Page 2 of 3 3. Ms. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is a rustic villager and had no knowledge about intricacies of law. Without filing any application under section 64 of the Act before the Collector, the Petitioner directly filed an application before the LAR & R Authority (N.D.) under section 64 of the Act. Though notices were sent to him for his appearance and participation in the hearing of the reference but due to intervening pandemic of Covid-19 and ‘cease work’ called by the lawyers of the Sambalpur, he could not participate in the proceeding and adduce evidence in support of his case for enhancement of the compensation. Accordingly, the impugned order has been passed. 4. Ms. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that although the Petitioner has remedy of the appeal under the provisions of the Act against the impugned order, but the same being time consuming and the reference being decided without delving into the merit of the case of the Petitioner, he should be given an opportunity to contest the reference before the LAR & R Authority, Sambalpur. 5. Mr. Biswal, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that documents available on record clearly reveal that the Petitioner was given ample opportunity to appear before the Authority participate in the proceeding. But, for the reasons best known to him, he neither appeared before the Authority nor produced any document in support of his case. Hence, the Authority has committed no error in confirming the award passed in favour of the Petitioner for acquisition of his land. 6. Taking note of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that notice was issued to the Petitioner to p. 3 appear and contest the reference by filing documents in support of his case. It is however submitted by Ms. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner that due to intervening pandemic of Covid-19 and ‘cease work’ called by the lawyers of the Sambalpur, the petitioner could not be represented before the Authority. 7. In that view of the matter, since a valuable right of the Petitioner to seek for enhancement of the compensation under the provisions of the Act is taken away by the impugned order, he should be given another opportunity to participate in the reference and put forth his case. 8. Accordingly, impugned order dated 8th August, 2022 (Annexure-2) is set aside and the matter is remitted to LAR & R Authority (N.D.), Sambalpur for fresh adjudication of the reference (L.A. Case No. 38 of 2020) in accordance with law giving opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. In order to avoid further delay in the matter, the Petitioner is directed to appear on 15th September, 2025 before the learned LAR & R Authority (N.D.), Sambalpur to receive further instructions in the matter. 9. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (Savitri Ratho) Judge Sisir Designation: Personal Assistant