1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr. P.K. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. S. Nayak, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-opposite parties.
3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 27.04.2023 passed by opposite party no. 4-Tahasildar, Mahanga in Misc. Case No. 32 of 2023 arising out of L.A. Case No. 16/97 and further to issue direction to opposite party no. 4 to rectify the RORs under Annexures-13 & 14 respectively by excluding the petitioner's plots and areas from the ROR under Annexure-13 and including the petitioner's plots and areas in the ROR under Annexure-14.
4. Mr. P.K. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the land in question of the petitioner was acquired in 1997 under the old Act, i.e. Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and due compensation was paid to the father of the petitioner. But subsequently it is revealed that for the purpose the land was acquired was not used. Therefore, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the said unused land should be returned to the petitioner as per the provisions contained in Section 101 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, which specifically states that when any land, acquired under the Act remains unutilized for a period of five years from the date of taking over the possession, the same shall be returned to the original owner or owners or their legal heirs, as the case may be, or to the Land Bank of the appropriate Government by reversion in the manner as may be prescribed by the appropriate Government.
5. In view of the above, a question is raised that if the land was acquired under the old Act, for which the petitioner was paid compensation whether any action taken in the old Act has been protected under the new Act and even Section 103 of the new Act also gives certain protection whether the same is adequate or not, to which learned counsel appearing for the petitioner will address this Court to that extent.
6. Put up this matter next week.