This bench disposed of a writ petition complaining of inaction by the Tahasildar. It held the petitioner can seek implementation of the Additional Commissioner's order via an application, citing an apex court decision, and dismissed the petition.
Petitioner directed to file application for implementation before Additional Commissioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(C) No.17571 of 2015
03.11.2015 The grievance of the petitioner is that though a direction by the Additional C
ommissioner, Settlement and Consolidation, Sambalpur in R.P. No.194 of 2010 to the Tahasildar
to conduct field inquiry to ascertain the possession of the petitioner and pass order, but the
later he is sitting over the matter.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Adv
ocate for the State-opposite party.
In view of the authoritative pronouncement in the case of State of Karnataka v
s. Vishwabharati House Building Cooperative Society and others, (2003) 2 SCC 412, the apex Cou
rt held that every authority has ancillary/incidental power to implement its own order.
In view of the same, it is open to the petitioner to file appropriate applicat
ion before the Additional Commissioner, Settlement and Consolidation, Sambalpur for implementa
tion of its order.
The petition is disposed of.
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can file an application for implementation of the order of the Additional Commissioner.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Karnataka vs. Vishwabharati House Building Cooperative Society and othersReferred¶4
State of Karnataka vs. Vishwabharati House Building Cooperative Society and others, (2003) 2 SCC 412 · Who else cites this
Petitioner
State
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court