SANJU PANDA, J. W.P.(C) NO.19908 OF 2009 (Decided on 22.06.2011) KVK NILACHAL POWER (P) LTD. ………Petitioner. .Vrs. STATE OF ORISSA & ORS. ……….Opp.Parties. ORISSA LAND REFORMS ACT,1960(ACT NO.16 OF 1960) – S.38, 73(c ). For Petitioner - M/s. Milan Kanungo, Y.Mohanty, D.Pradhan & S.K.Mishra. For Opp.Parties - Additional Govt. Advocate (for O.P.Nos.1 to 4) Mr. S.N.Sahoo & P.R.Bhuyan (for O.P. No.5) S.PANDA, J. In this writ application, the petitioner has challenged the action taken by the Tahasildar, Athagarh by issuing notice dated 16.12.2009 under Annexure-8 alleging that the same is without jurisdiction. 2. The facts leading to the present case are as follows: The petitioner is a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. To set up a Thermal Power Plant, the petitioner- company signed an MOU with the Government of Orissa in the Energy Department on 26.9.2006. For the said purpose, the petitioner-company requires approximately 1200 acres of land. As per the MOU, land for the project was to be acquired by the Government of Orissa through IDCO and leased out to the petitioner-company. The petitioner-company submitted its requisition for land required for the project to IDCO vide its letter dated 12.2.2008 through IPICOL. Accordingly, IDCO submitted its proposal to the Collector, Cuttak for acquisition of 540.961 acres of private land in four villages under Athagarh Tahasil of Cuttack and also sent a proposal to the Tahasildar, Athagarh vide series of letters dated 14.3.2008 for alienation of Government land measuring 345 acres. In pursuance of the aforesaid letters, a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 11.7.2008 by the Government for acquisition of 540.961 acres of land situated in the four villages, namely, Rahangol, Dalua, Khanduali and Kandarei under Athagarh Tahasil. The Government also formulated Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy, 2006 for the displaced persons. According to the said Policy, the entrepreneurs were required to purchase the land from the private parties for establishment of industries. IDCO vide its letter dated 7.8.2008 advised the petitioner-company to go for direct purchase of land on negotiation. In order to expedite the project, the petitioner-company with all bona fides purchased 159.037 acres of land from private landowners through mutual negotiations during the period from 28.3.2008 till publication of the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act on 11.7.2008. All the lands purchased by the petitioner-company had been post-facto incorporated in the said 4(1) notification on 11.7.2008 by the Revenue Department. The Government in Revenue Department also made a notification under Section 73(c) of the OLR Act on 8.12.2008 which was published in the Official Gazette dated 18.12.2008. 3. From the record, it transpires that the petitioner-company purchased the private land measuring 91.466 acres between 11.7.2008 and 8.12.2008, i.e., the dates of publication of Government notifications under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and a new notification under Section 73(c) of the said Act. A total of about 250.53 acres of land was purchased from the private land owners for establishment of industries before issuance of the notification under Section 73(c) of the OLR Act. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in pursuance of the direction given by the Sub-Collector, Athagarh on 27.1.2009 to initiate a ceiling proceeding, a notice under Section 37 of the OLR Act was issued to the petitioner company on 16.12.2009 by the Tahasildar, Athagarh fixing the date of hearing on 31.12.2009. The petitioner-company also made a detailed representation to the State Government through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Bhubaneswar on 3.12.2009 ventilating its grievance. As no action was taken thereon, the petitioner-company filed this writ application challenging the action of the OLR authorities. 5. Mr. S.K. Padhi, learned Senior Advocate, submitted that since a notification under Section 73(c) of the OLR Act was issued by the Government declaring the area in question as industrial area and such notification was published in the Official Gazette, the provision of the OLR Act is not attracted to the land in question and as such, the notice issued by the Tahasildar to initiate a proceeding under the said Act is misconceived and liable to be quashed. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that since the petitioner- company purchased the land prior to the notification published under Section 73(c) of the OLR Act, rightly the proceeding under the said Act was initiated. He further submitted that after purchasing the land, the petitioner-company should have complied with the provision of Section 38 of the OLR Act to get the land exempted from ceiling proceeding and as that was not done, the Revenue authority has rightly initiated the proceeding. 7. Considering the rival submissions of the parties, the question that crops up for examination by this Court is whether the OLR Act is applicable to the land which was covered the notification published by the Government under Section 73(c) of the Act in the Official Gazette. 2 For better appreciation, Section 73(c) of the OLR Act is quoted hereunder: “73 – Act not to apply to certain lands – Nothing contained in this Act, shall apply – (a) & (b) xxx xxx xxx (c) to any area which the Government may, from time to time by notification in the Official Gazette specify as being reserved for urban, non-agricultural or industrial development or for any other specific purposes; and (d) xxx xxx xxx” The Notification under Section 73(c) was published by the Government on 18.12.2008. Copies of the same are annexed as Annexure-5 series to this writ application which reveal that the land situated in villages of Khanduali, Kandarei, Dalua and Rahangol of Athagarh Tashild was required for industrial development. Though the land was purchased prior to the said notification, the petitioner-company on the instruction of IDCO purchased the land from the private land-owners for establishment of industries which was not disputed. 8. From a reading of Section 73(c) of the OLR Act, it is crystal clear that the Government has to issue a notification from time to time regarding establishment of industries and declaring the area as reserved for urban, non-agricultural purposes or for any specific purposes and once the area is declared as such by a Gazette Notification, the OLR Act will not apply to the said area. In the present case, the notification under Section 73(c) was published in the Official Gazette on 18.12.2008. The Tahasildar initiated the proceeding in the year 2009. The petitioner-company purchased the land to set up industries. Since the required notification under Section 73(c) was already published, the petitioner-company need not comply with the provision of Section 38 of the Act to get the said land exempted from the ceiling proceeding. Therefore, as the notification under Section 73(c) published in the Official Gazette, the provisions of the OLR Act is not applicable to the land in question in the present case. Hence, the proceeding initiated by the Tahasildar against the petitioner-company under the Act is barred under law and the same is quashed. In the result, the writ application is allowed. There shall no order as to cost. Writ petition allowed. 3